ST J.J. Abrams to direct and co-write Star Wars: Episode IX (see warning on page 34 before posting)

Darkslayer dont want to be too rude but looking at your sw movie ranking you clearly like a certain vision of SW that very few people share. I mean, even PT fans dont think ANH and TESB are below the 3 PT movies. It is your right to prefer them but it's a big bias. The PT actually divided the fans. The ST will probably divide as well but the backlash back then for the PT was just too huge to be ignored. (even if it has its fans). It stills has a bad reputation. So yes SW was becoming a bit irrevelant before these neo sw movies and that was because of the PT,.even if you consider it unfair. It was all kiddie cartoon/toys and EU limbo a few years after ROTS release... So yes they had to FIX something, for better or for worse.

 

While I do appreciate a lot of PT locations and design elements for their aesthetic value, I'll need more than surface repetition in order to gain some new fondness for Abrams as a SW filmmaker. Part of why I appreciate the PT so much is because it in turn made me appreciate SW in a new way. Suddenly many of my favorite scenes in the overall series tended towards quieter mood pieces, and evoked a more somber emotional response that was quite different to the way I grew up loving the OT. So no, merely revisiting Coruscant will not instantly earn my appreciation. Actually Abrams could entirely ignore the PT and its various stylistic and narrative traits and still come up with something I dig provided he simply makes a better film than TFA. I don't have anything against the guy personally. I liked Super 8 quite a bit. His Star Trek was mostly fun (and I think he was missed on Beyond). I just think TFA is a poor Star Wars film.

 

Abrams' co-writer Chris Terrio is an interesting choice. He won an Oscar for writing Argo. Then wrote BvS. Which is fine, I'm not sure the script was the problem with that movie. We'll see what his writing is like for Justice League in a few months.

 

Are you suggesting that the Star Wars brand wasn't tarnished after the PT? That a mutli-billion dollar corp, with access to the finest in market testing, spent over a 100 million dollars crafting, and marketing, an OT heavy film because the franchise was generally precieved to be in great shape, just dormant?

If that were the case, why didn't TFA just continue in the same visual and tonal vain as the PT? Since it was so beloved it would seem like business idiocy to skip over a series of very lucrative, and apparently deeply beloved, films?

 

The PT spawned one of the most beloved animated series of all time. And I would disagree that it has a bad reputation. Batman & Robin is a film with a bad reputation. The prequels are nowhere near that, regardless of my rankings of the films.

And by the way, I love 7 out of the 8 films almost equally, so it's not like I only like the PT. I just have a slight preference for it because it blew my mind as a kid.

 

well that settles it. No answers as to who the hell rey is, character arcs left unfinished, more dumb questions that will be "left up to the viewer" and never ever answered.

 

That's some nice hyperbole you're throwing at me.

I personally think TFA isn't as OT heavy on its visual aesthetic as you make it out to be. Outside of some pretty plain environments, they utilized a hell of a lot of green screen, CGI technology. They acted as if there was a return to practical effects, but we all know how that one turned out.

I mean, are we still acting like Disney is trying to make people forget about the PT? They throw freaking Jimmy Smits as Bail Organa in Rogue One, along with Mustafar, and we're still having this discussion on repairing the reputation that the PT supposedly laid on Star Wars? Come on now.

 

Lets try this again, but without the attempts to divert.

In relation to TFA, the film that relaunched Star Wars, why was the film visually and tonally styled so heavily after the OT (which has nothing to do with SE work, btw) if the previous 3 films were so wildly popular, so beloved? Why did the marketing lean so heavily on the OT?

There were so many ways to make the TFA quite heavily PT influenced, even as a direct equel to ROTJ. Why did Disney take NONE of that road if the PT was this widely loved trilogy? If you're right that would've made the most business sense. It would've been more Mad Max: Fury Road, less Logan.

 

(Please fix the quote if possible -- wasn't my "opinion" that the franchise was *not* in need of saving).

In fact, the franchise was saved by the acquisition by Disney, as they produced more films. JJ/LK/KK's introduction of new characters and bringing the stories to a new generation played a great role in that as well. My comment was not a hit on the PT Darkslayer ....

 

http://variety.com/2017/film/news/carrie-fisher-not-in-star-wars-episode-ix-1202031153/

 

I can agree that TFA was something of a hybrid. It was inspired by the style of the OT, but took more time for emotional moments. I don't think they were milked though. When I think about moments like Rey's quieter scenes with Han and Finn or her scenes on Jakku or with Maz, I honestly think they demonstrate a perfect balance of character and emotion for this style of film. They're above reproach to me, walking a line between the heightened drama of the saga while peppering moments that feel genuine and completely human.

And to think JJ got so much of that in those quiet moments with a first-time leading actress. That's why I'm excited for his return.

 

Did we watch the same movie?

 

Darkslayer You cant deny that at the very least the PT divided the fandom. and sorry but its reputation is of being a messs. I personally think they are quite good ideas and concepts in these films (the peplum/political aspect, the guts to do something very different, and all the world building) but its execution, script and silly/cringeworthy moments (vader built C3PO? Ani? Yoda the jumping digital pea? Palpatine's spin? CGI clones?) had always been pointed out by a lot of people. media and audience included. Doesn't mean they're right, but it's been there since their release.

 

I love how you use the word "beloved" even though that word never came out of my mouth...er, keyboard. I merely said the general audience enjoyed it, and provided you with another source of that argument which you took offense to, for some reason.

As far as why did the marketing rely so heavily on the OT? Maybe it had something to do with the return of Han Solo, Princess Leia and Luke Skywalker? Maybe because it was closer in the timeline to the OT than the PT? Maybe because JJ admitted he grew up with and loved the OT aesthetic and that's what he wanted to see as the director of the picture (though I don't think the visual style is as OT-centric as he or you make it out to be).

I mean, it kinda is PT influenced. Do you think it's an accident that Kylo Ren is a whiny, immature brat like Anakin? Do you think it's an accident that he and Rey get into the same physical struggle that Anakin and Obi-Wan do in ROTS? Do you think it's an accident that Ren gets a scar across his face to visually evoke Anakin?

 

It was the best movie of 2016 that pit two pop-culture icons against each other right?

Spoiler

A fine example for Star Wars to look to.

 

I can see a little break for some sleep has brought me back to a completely rational discussion.... I particularly like that the PT wars have begun again... bound to be something new and original in there!

 

I know it wasn't you. I wasn't aware of the quoting error until you pointed it out. But it's too late to edit.

 

We're discussing Star Wars movies, there's nothing to be offended by.

Of course there were millions of people who enjoyed the PT. They were, contrary to some people's beliefs, not universally panned, not at all. There are plenty of people who loved TPM, AOTC and ROTS, including some critics.

Do you not realize we're talking about the mixed-to-negative overall reaction to the PT? Nobody, from I can see in this thread, is being literal, or discounting that there are plenty of people who liked, even loved, the PT.

But, again, that's not how business works. If Disney saw the PT as so well embraced you'd have seen a very different Episode 7, no matter who was directing it.

The whiney, immature thing started with Luke Skywalker in 1977. Rey vs Kylo isn't grounded in the PT fight styles at all.

Regardless, nobody said the PT was totally purged from TFA. There are slight hints and wispers. However the film goes out of it's way to present a universe that looks almost frozen in time since ROTJ.

 

Ok. There is nothing in that link which addresses my question (Other than it isn't stated in those particular articles)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

That's fine, bud. I don't even deny that at least the first two PT films received a mixed reaction (though the attempted rewrite of the response to ROTS irks me to no end). You and I are in agreement here: they weren't universally panned. But, as they weren't universally panned, it's my deduction that the general audience didn't need Star Wars to be saved. They just wanted more Star Wars. And based on the repeat business of TPM, it's hard to look at that and say, "The general audience didn't like it."

Even so, I think there was some backlash at TFA because some (not myself) saw it as too OT-centric. Thus the course correction with Rogue One to make Saga and OT only fans happy.

The Rey/Kylo fight is kind of a weird mix of styles. I was speaking mostly of the literal physical wrist lock from ROTS and TFA. It was a nice nod that I caught right away (and certainly appreciated).

I do think it's by design, but that's because the OT was already supposed to be a progression from the PT (not in CG obviously, but in the in-universe ship designs, etc).

 

Is anyone worried about TLJ due to the fact that JJ got IX and not Rian?

 

Not really, the word is that they asked Rian but he declined because it would have been too much for him.

 

Again, they approached Rian and he turned it down. Only then did they go to J.J. Which suggests that they were happy with Rian's work.

 

Zack Snyder also had a lot of input in BVS. So it's hard to tell how much of that film's issues were on him and how much were on Terrio. Given that Snyder's other films have been critiqued for having pacing issues, questionable narrative structure, and hard to relate to characters, I'm inclined to pin more of the blame on him for BVS having more of the same.

When Terrio worked with a more talented director, Ben Affleck, we got Argo. Which was really good.

 

Ok. What I got from the link (and all the other interviews that followed which you can google but which I did not link).

KK did not specifically state that the role of Leia would not be recast in IX.

Carrie Fisher, will not be in IX. (obviously)

Carrie Fisher in a CGI form, will not be in IX.

Carrie Fisher's role in VIII will not be reworked into IX.

Some brave soul may feel that it would be really great for the franchise, to bring in a Carrie Fisher lookalike and have her play Leia in IX. God help them given the last 24 hours here.