|
Steve2911 posted:Eh the real issue is that they can't have fun with the fiction with so much already established, and so much of it poo poo. Or you can just say that the Jedi who are portrayed as wrong about everything else were also wrong about the Force.
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 23:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 10:34 |
|
Nessus posted:The only interesting thing I've ever seen done with it was that one of the Macross movies was later treated as an in-universe film in later series set in the same universe. Which was a bit clever, but hardly rear end-blastingly novel. Yeah. One of the Star Wars novels plays with this idea too. Ross posted:I feel like it's sort of necessary here though, with as wide-ranging as the EU was. Star Trek stuff is actually a whole lot bigger and wide-ranging than the Star Wars EU. Of course, they did have a "canon policy" but it was solely that nothing but the TV shows and movies counted, rather than the convoluted mess of Star Wars that only a handful of fans attempted to ever understand.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 23:47
|
|
|
feedmyleg posted:So were there no 11 year olds in your screening? Because I was a dumb kid who saw Phantom Menace in the theater multiple times, and every time all the kids laughed and laughed at his antics, said he was their favorite character, bought his action figures and merchandise. He was put in as comic relief for kids. In a movie that George Lucas has said over and over again was made for kids. Just because you don't find him funny doesn't mean that he wasn't intended as a comic character. I could see the character appealing to a 7 or 8 year old then nothing else in the story would make sense to someone that age.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 00:02
|
|
|
unlimited shrimp posted:I was 12 when TPM came out and I remember hating Jar Jar and being bored by the movie when I saw it opening night. Different strokes I guess. Yeah, the whole "for kids" argument runs into problems when you consider how much of the film is bland exposition, talking about trade agreements, and general politicking for large chunks.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 00:09
|
|
|
After watching that lightsaber featurette thing does anyone else find it weird that George doesn't call things he invited the right names? Like he is constantly talking about lazer swords and ray guns despite presumably being the one who decided to call them lightsabers and blasters. Its obviously a stupid point, we all know what he means... but its just quite funny that for all the over the top star wars nerds in the world, the actual creator of these movies couldn't give a poo poo what the glowy sticks are called.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 00:15
|
|
|
mitochondritom posted:After watching that lightsaber featurette thing does anyone else find it weird that George doesn't call things he invited the right names? Like he is constantly talking about lazer swords and ray guns despite presumably being the one who decided to call them lightsabers and blasters. Its obviously a stupid point, we all know what he means... but its just quite funny that for all the over the top star wars nerds in the world, the actual creator of these movies couldn't give a poo poo what the glowy sticks are called. Lucas has never given one iota of a poo poo about canon and he only tolerated the EU because he enjoys fan productions (but will not be limited by them in any way).
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 00:41
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Lucas has never given one iota of a poo poo about canon and he only tolerated the EU because he enjoys
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 00:45
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Yeah. One of the Star Wars novels plays with this idea too. When the prequels were coming out / in theaters I recall starwars.com having some convoluted system with different levels of canonicity but I never paid much attention to it. unlimited shrimp posted:I was 12 when TPM came out and I remember hating Jar Jar and being bored by the movie when I saw it opening night. Different strokes I guess. Nobody has made the following point as far as I've seen in this thread, just a thought/observation, but I have a really hard time believing the OT was made with kids primarily in mind. Not that that prevents the PT from being made with kids primarily in mind. But adults loved the OT too and Darth Vader and the Emperor were loving scary when you were eight years olds. I used to run out of the room when the Emperor zaps Luke with Force lightning in ROTJ. Ross fucked around with this message at 00:51 on Dec 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 00:48
|
|
|
He actually rated different spoof films at one point. Ross posted:When the prequels were coming out / in theaters I recall starwars.com having some convoluted system with different levels of canonicity but I never paid much attention to it. The policy bloated in size after it was instituted, lol. Star Wars is the best kind of kid movie- one that's willing to scare kids a little and make 'em worry.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 00:55
|
|
|
Ross posted:Nobody has made the following point as far as I've seen in this thread, just a thought/observation, but I have a really hard time believing the OT was made with kids primarily in mind. Not that that prevents the PT from being made with kids primarily in mind. But adults loved the OT too and Darth Vader and the Emperor were loving scary when you were eight years olds. I used to run out of the room when the Emperor zaps Luke with Force lightning in ROTJ. Jaws and Star Wars were both rated PG, which at the time meant "Contains material not generally suitable for pre-teenagers". There was still a G-rating for "all audiences" that meant a movie was suitable for kids in the same way Jar Jar is (presumably) suitable/enjoyable for kids, but I'm guessing the original Star Wars was meant for people maybe 10-12 and up. A G-rated film in 1977 was Herbie Goes to Monte Carlo or The Rescuers. Like full-on Disney kids movie stuff. e. Next step up in '77 was an R rating, and those were movies like Animal House and Alien (ultra-violence, sex and drugs). unlimited shrimp fucked around with this message at 01:16 on Dec 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 01:13
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Or you can just say that the Jedi who are portrayed as wrong about everything else were also wrong about the Force.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 01:29
|
|
|
Ave Azaria posted:You can, but the whole topic of the Force feels tired now, regardless. Maybe if you're 35.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 01:30
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Maybe if you're 35. I'm the same age as my parents when SW77 came out 
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 01:31
|
|
|
Ave Azaria posted:I'm the same age as my parents when SW77 came out Oh God, so am I. Thanks loads for that little mortality checkup.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 01:47
|
|
|
Tusen Takk posted:So since I've seen a few people bashing Abrams, in everyone's wildest wet dreams, who would YOU have had directing SWTFA instead of Abrams? I think JJ is a great choice, but Chris Nolan could have been amazing as well since he seems to be better with dark themes and after Interstellar, it's safe to say that he knows how to make a space movie with lots of CGI done well etc etc. Joseph Kosinski or Doug Liman would be my picks over JJ
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 01:57
|
|
|
Tusen Takk posted:So since I've seen a few people bashing Abrams, in everyone's wildest wet dreams, who would YOU have had directing SWTFA instead of Abrams? I think JJ is a great choice, but Chris Nolan could have been amazing as well since he seems to be better with dark themes and after Interstellar, it's safe to say that he knows how to make a space movie with lots of CGI done well etc etc. The only answer is David Fincher.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 02:01
|
|
|
TheMaestroso posted:Man, that would be like the Star Wars equivalent of Zeitgeist. And I'd totally watch it. Only if he pretends to rape a cat before telling us why the child mass murderer is the good guy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 02:04
|
|
|
Has it been established who Andy Serkis is playing after possibly hearing him in the trailer? I read he may be doing motion capture work for some new aliens. Perhaps he is doing the motion capture for the Falcon, and his voice is the talking hyperdrive motivator that finally learned basic. Hell, maybe the Falcon narrates the whole movie, he certainly knows the back story.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 02:04
|
|
|
iSheep posted:The only answer is David Fincher. Camera drills down a Jedi's arm and into her blood showing you the midichlorians.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 02:07
|
|
|
TheBuilder posted:Has it been established who Andy Serkis is playing after possibly hearing him in the trailer? I read he may be doing motion capture work for some new aliens. My sources indicate this is accurate.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 02:12
|
|
|
TheBuilder posted:Has it been established who Andy Serkis is playing after possibly hearing him in the trailer? I read he may be doing motion capture work for some new aliens. I'd definitely watch a Cars movie set in the Star Wars Universe.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 02:15
|
|
|
TheMaestroso posted:Yeah, the whole "for kids" argument runs into problems when you consider how much of the film is bland exposition, talking about trade agreements, and general politicking for large chunks. Kids probably understand the films better than most adults. Take General Grievous, again. Tons of fans have complained that he has no motivation because there's no exposition straight-up telling you what his motivation is. So, fans say, you need the EU to 'get' what's going on. This is another good example of why Star Wars fans don't actually like Star Wars, because Grievous' motivations are extremely clear in the film. He's the commander of the droid armies, he's always surrounded by droids, he himself is basically a robocop, and he hates Jedis. (Undoubtedly, because they're who dismembered him.) When the text says 'there are heroes on both sides,' what it means is that Grievous is a hero of the droids. These are the same droids who were saying 'die, Jedi dogs!' in part 2. And he's not some automaton; Grievous takes pride in being better at using a laser sword than the Jedi themselves. Obiwan can only win by cheating, and then pretending it was the ray gun that was 'uncivilized' instead of himself. Of course, Grievous' desire to one-up the Jedi ends up turning him into the thing he hates most, and Obiwan defeats him by, essentially 'lowering himself' to the level of a common droid. This conflict over class and 'civilization' is in the context of the broader story, where Grievous has been propped up by the Republic as a sort of Osama Bin Laden figure. Like, "once we capture Grievous, the war will be over... right?" This is backed up by the orientalist imagery from Sinbad and Raiders Of The Lost Ark. The overall joke, in any case, is that a Jedi is indistinguishable from a crummy Seperatist puppet, and the way out of this false conflict is to put down the laser sword and pick up the ray gun. Kids might not get all of this, but they'll get much more of it, intuitively, than a grown-up who ignores the imagery and looks to the plot exposition.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 02:24
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:Camera drills down a Jedi's arm and into her blood showing you the midichlorians. Meticulously shot lightsaber battles which the rumor from the set took 259 takes before Fincher was satisfied.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 02:25
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Kids probably understand the films better than most adults. e: \/ thank god George Lucas wasted hours on political nonsense to convey that message otherwise the kids might have missed such a subtle and nuanced point unlimited shrimp fucked around with this message at 02:47 on Dec 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 02:44
|
|
|
unlimited shrimp posted:I'd love to hear a kid's understanding of the political nonsense in the films. "It's all so the evil space wizard can take over" (the objective truth).
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 02:45
|
|
|
Let David Lynch do it. He was attatched to RotJ at one point, anyway. Luke turns into a force-squid with teeth for eyes while sad ragtime music plays over a radio; original music scored by a choir of deformed children.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 02:48
|
|
|
unlimited shrimp posted:I'd love to hear a kid's understanding of the political nonsense in the films. palpatine's behind it all
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 02:50
|
|
|
This is starting to sound like RLM's assertion that only an auteur like Jim Jarmusch could truly pull off the complexity of the Star Wars prequels.unlimited shrimp posted:I'd love to hear a kid's understanding of the political nonsense in the films. The political stuff is entirely sensible, but clouds adults to the dark side - which is actually really blatant and obvious, operating right in front of them. There's the scene in Part 1 when Anakin asks why they're not rescuing the slaves, and the scene in Part 2 where a child literally has to explain things to Obiwan. It's deliberate.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 02:59
|
|
|
Some - not all - of the political stuff is necessary since a big thing throughout is that the Jedi Order is outdated and lovely and needs to be rebooted.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 03:01
|
|
|
Gonz posted:Let David Lynch do it. He was attatched to RotJ at one point, anyway.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 03:02
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:This is starting to sound like RLM's assertion that only an auteur like Jim Jarmusch could truly pull off the complexity of the Star Wars prequels.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 03:15
|
|
|
Asema posted:I really felt like Super 8 was a supernatural goonies. It was definitely an attempt/homage at those Speilbergian boyhood-magic nostalgia 80s summer films. I think JJ isn't a bad fit for the simple mythos and Sci-Fi Adventure genre-chassis that provided the inertia for Star Wars. Its just a matter of having a decent enough script, translating it into the medium without discombobulation, and getting the performances you need from your actors to mesh with all the bells and whistles modern audiences expect. Berk Berkly fucked around with this message at 03:31 on Dec 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 03:27
|
|
|
unlimited shrimp posted:"The prequels were needlessly bogged down in political nonsense" /= "Only an auteur could pull it off" They were (and I was) referring to thematic complexity, not plot complexity.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 03:38
|
|
|
I really really want Alfonso Cuaron to do a Star Wars movie.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 03:52
|
|
|
I'm tempted to say Wachowskis because they really can bring amazing visual direction on the screen and take on challenges constantly. Speed Racer and Cloud Atlas are quite different and even if not completely successful or considered great movies I'd say they did a good job for both. Or on the other hand Gore Verbinski...just so we can hear the stories of him going "No, NO! I want a literal Death Star made for the set! I need Eleventy billion dollars now!" I think either would work quite well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 04:01
|
|
|
Star Wars is a trilogy in which the antagonist serves an Empire that supplanted a Republic (vestiges of which endured for nearly 20 years). It is also a trilogy in which that antagonist is notorious for betraying and exterminating the mystic order which a liar believed to have guarded that Republic. It is inevitable that a prequel describing the origin of that antagonist would feature political elements. And there's not even really that much - just enough to demonstrate how and why the situation in the Senate is hosed. You don't need to invent reasons to dislike the prequels. It's okay to say that the characters' dialog was flat and dry and did not reveal their personalities. In fact, that's a great reason to dislike a movie - to a social being such as your typical human viewer, nothing is as consistently interesting as a person, or a rich and detailed facsimile thereof. Without that, without a fellow mind to imagine and empathize with, what reason is there to care about their story? Contrast Hayden Christiansen's character with Ian McDiarmid's. It's important to Anakin's character that he is prone to anger, especially towards the Jedi, which is why he so often says that he is angry about the Jedi and hates the thing they do and then describes the reason why. George knew that it would be important to establish Anakin's feelings, because without that fact being established, it would make no sense for him to do what he does; consequently, a lot of Anakin's lines are used for that purpose (a director with different strengths and priorities might have had the actor convey that fact through his acting instead). On the other hand, it's not important to Palpatine's character that he just loving loves being evil, only that he is evil, so Palpatine's lines mostly concern the evil thing that he is doing, while his feelings toward that evil are conveyed to the viewer nonverbally. One of the two characters literally tells the audience his exact motivations; the other is widely praised even by viewers who found it difficult to relate to the first.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 04:02
|
|
|
KidVanguard posted:I really really want Alfonso Cuaron to do a Star Wars movie. Comedy option: Wes Anderson Star Wars. E: Additional comedy options - Tarantino, Allen Red Dad Redemption fucked around with this message at 04:08 on Dec 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 04:02
|
|
|
Gatts posted:I'm tempted to say Wachowskis because they really can bring amazing visual direction on the screen and take on challenges constantly. Speed Racer and Cloud Atlas are quite different and even if not completely successful or considered great movies I'd say they did a good job for both. Or on the other hand Gore Verbinski...just so we can hear the stories of him going "No, NO! I want a literal Death Star made for the set! I need Eleventy billion dollars now!" If there was still the Imperial Japan motif I would say the Wachowskis but you can probably approximate their contribution to Star Wars with Jupiter Ascending.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 04:05
|
|
|
Sheikh Djibouti posted:Comedy option: Wes Anderson Star Wars. Except a Tarantino Star Wars would rule?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 04:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 10:34 |
|
|
KidVanguard posted:Except a Tarantino Star Wars would rule? Star Wars with Morricone and Bowie needle drops. Sign me up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2014 04:43
|
|
