Speculation Will Disney listen to the fans and give them what they want?

All i want is a film that has an original story while not disregarding previous canon.

 

Why should Disney listen to bickering fans. There is absolutely nothing that the fans can agree on with the exception of "Please don't make a movie that sucks"...and even then a few trolls at this site would probably disagree with that comment.

 

Whence comes this idea that artistic endeavor is an exclusively individual experience, and that the only view that matters from any perspective whatsoever is that of the original author? I truly do not understand it. I'm a novelist, and prose writing is a highly individualized form of artistic endeavor (certainly moreso than making a movie, in which literally hundreds of people are involved), but to think that I could, working solely by myself, produce the best work I possibly could is both unrealistic and shockingly arrogant. Feedback is important, so is editting and the exposure to other viewpoints. Honestly, writer's can't even manage to catch all of their own typos, never mind far more significant difficulties.

If the artist doesn't care at all what others think, if they don't want other people to both enjoy the work and process what they are trying to say critcally, even if the message is just 'have fun,' then why would you ever bother to release it at all? And once something is released would you really go so far as to say every other possible interpretation besides your own is without any value at all? Yes as a technical matter George Lucas does not 'owe' anyone anything regarding Star Wars, but I do not think so little of the man to believe that his entire purpose in doing the movies was only for his own enjoyment and to make a lot of money.

And thirty-five years is too long? Really? Copyright projections exist to compensate an artist for time and effort put in, not to provide monopoly on ideas. Lucas doesn't need any more money, seriously, he's giving billions of dollars away off this whole deal, which would seem to indicate a view closer to my own on this point. The reality that the Walt Disney company has expended an extraordinary amount of lobbying effort to lengthen copyright terms is not in dispute, they consider that a great sucess. And I'm sure it's good for the corporations of the world, but is it good for the people of it? No, I do not think so.

 

I want the chick with three **** from Total Recall.

"Baby, you make me wish I had three hands!"

 

I think there's a gulf, though, between looking for feedback and compromising your message for the pleasure of the audience, and it is this gulf that separates artists from entertainers. Artists create a work to entertain, yes, but their works also contain messages that they are trying to get across. They put a lot of themselves into their work, instead of merely looking at it from a marketing standpoint of pleasing as many people as possible. Entertainers don't necessarily hold to that notion though -- they create works in order to amuse you and hold your attention. But they don't necessarily have any greater thought or meaning put into it. That, in my mind, is the distinction between an artist an entertainer.

The way I look at it, an artist might very well be open to criticism from others, but if an element of the story is central to a point they are trying to get across, then I do think it's their right to include it, even if some people don't like it. Take Jar Jar as an example. Many people wish his character had been removed and there might very well have been staff that told Lucas he should cut him out of the film. But what if Jar Jar is an important component of a message that Lucas is trying to get across? Perhaps that tolerance is important or that all people have value? Or what if he wanted to include Jar Jar to contrast with the stoicism of the Jedi? Now, it's certainly fair for people to say that they didn't like Jar Jar and felt he detracted from the story, but I don't think that (in this hypothetical example) if Lucas keeps him in, he is dismissive of the opinions of others. It might simply be that Jar Jar is important to what Lucas is trying to say.

It's not that the audience's perspective on the work isn't important, it's that it's not up to them to dictate what is included in the work. The way I see it, any audience member can interpret a work any way they want, regardless of how much it contradicts the author's original intent. But I do think that there is a legitimate difference between "not altering a work in response to criticism" and "not listening to criticism."

As another example, besides Jar Jar, one of the most frequent points of contention in TPM is Anakin's age, with many people arguing that it would have been better if Anakin had been older. But I think that Lucas does a good job of explaining why he chose Anakin's age as he did -- chiefly, to heighten the effects of separation from his mother, which is an important plot point. These are merely examples, of course, but I just wanted to clarify my point of view -- an artist might not change their work, not because they refuse to listen to criticism, but because they have reasons that are important to their narrative to keep certain elements the way they are. It's not true for every case, obviously, but it's an important distinction.

And it's a problem I often notice with inexperienced writers (especially those who post their works on the internet) -- many of them will include gratuitous sex scenes, over-the-top violence, or popular elements in their works simply to get more hits or reviews. But I think maturing as an artist means you have to be able to stay true to your ideas.

 

Listen to the fans? Probably. Listen to the haters? Well, that's another story.

 

But there is where I think there is a disconnect, and a failure of logic which is so common here.

If you are making something "for the fans," which fans are you talking about? The hardcore (lesser in number) fans, or the more casual fans (far more numerous)? Making a more commercial product is something that causes MORE people to enjoy it, and thus makes more money. The things that George did that really made the hardcore fans mad were, if anything, geared toward entertaining MORE people.

The contradiction lies in "you aren't doing it for the fans, you are doing it for the money." Well gee, if I want to make more money, is that going to be achieved by making something that will please LESS people? No, people spend money on things they like, things they ARE a fan of.

Lucas is giving away billions so that he can retire, get away from sniping fans, and go into philanthropy to help education. That has nothing to do with giving SW up to public domain or succumbing to copyright laws.

No, I don't think it is good that the corporate world owns everything and makes all of the decisions, but I think that is only loosely related to the actual subject of SW giving the fans what they want in the sense that we are talking about here.

 

This is just a rough example:

100 % of the fans like the OT
50 % of the fans like the PT
10 % of the fans like the EU
5% of the fans like some EU
30% of the fans play the games

Disney shouldn't be about taking a poll in order to make a movie.

 

Why should Lucas "take on board fans feelings" or give them "what they want to see".

They are his movies and he told the the story he wanted to tell.

I see nothing "stubborn" in that.

And I hope Disney takes no notice of fans if half the ideas on stories and characters on this site are anything to go by.

And the customer is not always right - some of the time they are just jerks and over react to the most unimportant things and then they upset the girl at the register and the manager has to get involved and the other customers have to wait because one jerk was in a foul mood.

 

For the OT fans... Bring back the OT cast
For the PT fans... Lightsaber fighting style and species
For EU fans... A FEW of the EU Jedi
For the Video Game fans... Kyle Katarn
For TCW fans... Master Tano joins the order?

An original plot is necessary to a good movie, however using established popular EU characters that would effectively fullfill the role the writers are searching for would be cool. But DO NOT shoe horn EU characters in for no reason. Aalyaa Secura is perfect use of an EU character included and not shoehorned. Yet many purists feel any inclusion of EU is an insult to the films. I don't understand why.

 

I hope Disney gives this fan what he wants: A good, enjoyable movie!

 

For the same reason you feel throwing out any EU is an insult. They like what they like and are protective of it.

For the record, I think both extremes are silly. It makes good storytelling and business sense to re-start the EU with Episode VII coming out. At the sametime if ther eis a Jedi with green robes in the background of a sceened credit as Corran Horn, it doesn't/won't hurt the movie int he least.

 

Fans will never agree on what they want. Some folks want things that i find horrible , so i hope Disney just does what it wants to do and gives us a great next chapter for our beloved saga.

 

They will make themselves aware of fan's demands on certain things - but not make it just based on that.

I want them to make a great Star Wars movie - something that is a lot of fun much like the OT.

 

As Murphy's law states: If you try to please everyone, no one will like it.

Bob Fett in ANH is a prime example. Some people love the cameo, some people don't think it was necessary.

 

Does George Lucas actually react to criticism? Has he really changed things to satisfy complaining fans? Is that why the Attack of the Clones & the Revenge of the Sith were darker? Is that why Darth Maul returned in the Clone Wars show? I believe that they listen to what the audience says, but they aren't entertainers, they are artists that refuse to compromise the story to satisfy people. Because when Michaelangelo painted the Mono Lisa painting, he was not simply trying to make people happy, but was just trying to make good art and the future Star Wars films needs to focus on making more good art regardless of whether people will like it or not, and people usually do come to like good art eventually over time.

Give people what they need and not just what they want to ultimately satisfy them. But art can outlive the people who hate the Prequel Trilogy. Maybe in hundreds of years form now, there will be a less of a hate for the PT. Maybe people hated the Mono Lisa painting back when it was painted originally just like people hate the PT. But art can outlive those people to serve a greater purpose.

 

I think history will look favorably on the PT all things considered, especially ROTS and the way it tied the series together. As has been mentioned, ESB was not considered pure platinum when it first came out, only with time did it grow into that. Even now, I think the general pubic likes the PT, otherwise they wouldn't even consider releasing them on 3D; the hate for them comes from a relatively small group.

http://i989.photobucket.com/albums/af14/Nodo101/Blog%20****%20Talk/Haters1-2.jpg

 

I would delete the scenes of Padme naming her kids Luke and Leia because I want first time visitors to be as shocked as I was when I heard "I'm your father" and then "I'm your sister."

 

I sure as hell hope not! Otherwise will just get a bunch of recycled EU crap.

 

I guess the question is......do the fans actually know what they want. Based on what I have observed of the fans over the years, I don't think they always do.

 

SW fans are not some monolithic group that walk-in lockstep, ten minutes on this forum will show you that. Catering to your fan base by shoehorning in unnecessary elements is a great way to make a bad movie.

The only way to give the fans what they want is to make an excellent movie.

 

I hope not.

I was really dissapointed that many plot and character ideas I saw here before aotc and rots were actually in the movie. I felt that GL and co. tried too hard to please the fanbase (me included), and that led to inferior storytelling, plot and cinematography.

If you were here back then you probably saw many of the fan's plot ideas, cameos, etc. Almost forced into the script or editing.

Tons of exposition, etc.

So, no please Disney, make a movie for 8-12 yr old that their parents will enjoy. Think Shrek, or The incredibles. Not No 9 or other movies that fall told short to be an adult film and too weird to be a kid movie.

The ST should bring new fans and ideas while using some of the same basic rules of the gffa.

As such it HAS to ruffle some feathers in the die hard fans.

 

Not in the slightest. I am NOT a fan of OOT, and I like every single change (improvement!) made, and wish there were more improvements.

 

I just realized why so many people who got their hopes up hated the prequels. They ASKED Lucasfilm to make THEIR version of the film online, AND DIDN'T GET WHAT THEY ASKED FOR. There were a million opinions about what should happen, so of course that would be impossible to please them. It was the first INTERNET AGE Star Wars, where kids asked Santa for a Christmas present, and then were upset Lucas didn't use their online treatment.

 

Trust me, Lucas didn't use the message boards to write the prequels. The clones were going to be Stormtroopers, duh. The little connections and coincidences, like Jango and 3po were always what he did in 4-6.