Discussion Former Columbia exec Peter Sealey is OUT OF TOUCH

Star Wars sells itself, plain and simple. I have faith these future movies will entertain. The only thing they need to make sure of is keeping it live action, because if they don't, then I don't know...

One other thing. They need to pace these films so they don't seem like the movie of the week serials. Having them come out every two years will only hurt the writing and decrease interest in the long run.

 

I agree. Who really cares what a former studio suit thinks?

And Disney will be willing to spend real bank on these films in ways George never would. We're talking about mega budgets here.

 

Yeah. I'm looking forward to Celebration Avatar in 30 years time. It'll happen... right?

 

You got to remember the prequels didnt really break as many records as like Spider-Man cause Lucas limited screens. Only places up to Standers had it.


Also remember Disney bought more than Star Wars for their 4billion

 

I don't even think about Avatar anymore, and I'm not even excited about the upcoming sequels. There is NO WAY it has eclipsed Star Wars in a cultural sense, not even close. People will remember R2-D2, Yoda and Darth Vader for many, many years to come, no matter the outcome of the upcoming ST. Those characters are ingrained in the public's mind. Even my mom knows who they are and she has never watched a minute of Star Wars. I can't even name a character from Avatar. The only one that really stood out to me was the gruff no-nonsense military guy

 

Here is something else: my friend's young son's, ages 4 and 6, watched the classic trilogy this year and they LOVED it. That is lasting cultural relevance. After 35 years it can still touch something in a child's heart.

 

Phantom Menace had decent reviews (better than ROTJ originally). I think the criticism did hurt AOTC, but maybe less so than Lucasfilm's subdued marketing (compared to TPM). As for ROTS, remember it's the only SW movie (so far) with a PG-13 rating. It has a few things many parents might have found too disturbing for young kids.

 

People say the pt are bad but Rotten tomatoes give it a fresh. All but TPM

 

When did Box Office takings become a reflection of quality? Bay's Transformers movies all made huge amounts of money and two of them are terrible, Avatar is disticntly average and only grossed so much because of the inflated 3D ticket price (I beleive it sold fewer tickets than Titanic did).

Star Wars is and likely will continue to be the biggest franchise in the world, because it has things that last & aren't forgotten.

 

The following trilogies released over a similar period figures only for initial release:

Rings 3 film total 2.987 billion
Potter first 3 film total 2.648 billion
Spiderman 3 film total 2.494 billion
PT SW 3 film total 2.421 billion

 

Potter last 3 3.218 billion 2009/2011
Pirates last 3 3.072 billion 2006/2011
Rings 3 film total 2.987 billion 2001/2003
Avatar 1 film 2.782 billion 2009/10
Pirates first 3 2.683 billion 2003/2007
Transformers 3 film 2.668 billion 2007/2011
Potter first 3 film total 2.648 billion 2001/2004
Spiderman 3 film total 2.494 billion 2002/2007
Nolan Batman Trilogy 2.454 billion 2005/2012
PT SW 3 film total 2.421 billion 199/2005

Avengers 1 film 1.511 billion
The Hobbit ????
SW ST ???????


I don't care what ST makes as long as the films are good.

 

What do you mean? Do you mean the films being essentially from the mind of George Lucas to this point and now maybe becoming more studio fare?
I agree that is a concern;however, Lucas seems to still be involved at least in some way.........and Kathy Kennedy is one of the most successful producers ever and I truly believe she has Lucas' best interests at heart. They have a long-standing relationship...........and she has a HUGE incentive not to screw this up. You screw up the sequel trilogy and that leads your Hollywood bio forever.

She can do it with, as she herself put it, "her little Yoda(lucas) on her shoulder".

 

For whatever reason, SW seemed to do worse internationally relative to it's American take than most other franchises or megahits like Titanic. Was it viewed as too American? Or too hard to follow (i.e. only Phantom Menace can be considered a standalone).

 

The prequel Trilogy did great in terms of Box Office. All the films were box office smashes.

It followed a very similar path to the OT actually;

TPM/ANH made the most

AOTC/ESB made the least

ROTS/ROTJ in between

The films did great. All the Star Wars films have done good business, as will the Sequel movies.

 

In 1989 all three Star Wars films in the top 10 all time box office with 2 in the top 3. Only Indiana came close at that point but that was distant 2nd. The top ten, not adjusted for inflation, not in order, from Empire magazine and from memory (Summer 1989 but before Batman) was ET/SW/Jedi/Jaws/Raiders/Back to the Future/Ghostbusters/Hills Cop/Temple/Indy 3 In comparison the PT under performed. That's not say that I don't like them. I would rather watch them than Rings/Spiderman but they should have done far better. Why didn't they? Generally perceived as inferior by many fans. I also think that the marking for Phantom was far too saturated. Thousands and thousands of books went unsold. $1billion coke tie in. Deals with McDonalds/Pringles/Kellogs- I don't think the film matched the level of expectation.

 

YES. Even if the Star Wars movies never make as much as Avatar, Star Wars is an actual franchise. There's an expanded universe. There's other storylines. It's still going on. In short, there's non-movie content and a lot of it.
Avatar is not a developed franchise. It's a single, profitable movie.

 

Again you got to take in for account Star Wars PT played a less screens than most of those others

 

Right - Avatar is not immortal in the cultural sense. The same applies to The Avengers - I don't care how much you liked those movies, they don't have a lasting impact.

 

And

Star Wars A New Hope played at even less screens yet is the second most watched film in western cinemas- ever. If people want to go and see a film at the cinema they will. If play are watching the film at the cinema in significant numbers they keep it on the cinema.

 

Right - Avatar is not immortal in the cultural sense. The same applies to The Avengers - I don't care how much you liked those movies, they don't have a lasting impact.[/quote]

Don't think that we can assess the lasting impact of Avatar and Avengers until sequels are released. Prior to this week the cinematic future of new films in the Star Wars franchise appeared dead to many people. What the box office figures suggest is that Star Wars has taken a hit as the premier cinematic franchise. Lord of the Rings bests it both in critical and as a box office success. That I will never watch Lord of the Rings again, I found them boring, doesn't matter. I will predict and bet that the Hobbit Trilogy beats Sequel Star Wars trilogy for critical and boxofffice success. The only point I've tried to make is not a judgement on the quality of the films, I love Star Wars, but that it is no longer the No.1 cinematic franchise. I do think that with a good/great episode VII it can regain that status.

 

We'll see how Avatar unfolds... 3 sequels are on the way, and they are planning to build a veritable franchise around it.

Good luck with it, I liked Avatar, though nothing very special. The sad thing is, as a kid I would have loved it, all those cool creatures and sexy aliens.

But Star Wars is different at this point, its universe has so many access points: the films, novels, games, etc. Also, people generally like it, it's a lurker really.

 

[quote="Vespasian, post: 50139468, member: 1374735"

it's a lurker really.[/quote]


LOL