Lit A/V The Force Awakens and the EU [TAGGED spoilers.]

Cynda It's not about the EU, it's about the fact that I have never cared for Death Star Plan stories, even when the EU did it.

 

Then you're obviously not familiar enough with Jedi Dawn. Which is awesome.

 

Indeed I am not, and if it is the first hit I get on Wookieepedia, then I am thankful for having heretofore remained uninformed.

 

I need to somehow get hold of those books. A Star Wars Choose Your Own Adventure book sounds like it's just absolutely made of awesome.

 

It is.

Disclaimer: This opinion was formed at the age of nine / ten.

 

Didn't desann kill that guy

 

Yes.

 

It will all make sense when they release the DVD anthology alongside the ST boxed set!

 

Heh, yeah.

Still, see my most recent post over in the R1 thread.

 

they need to make an anthology film called Blue Harvest

 

Damnit, I've wanted "Star Wars Chronicles" spin-off films since I was a kid. I guess... I guess "Anthology" will have to do.

As for much of the debate and caterwauling in this thread (and others), a lot of these arguments about the perceived lack of originality in The Force Awakens and the jettisoning of the EU would be absolutely great if not for the fact that Kennedy and Abrams have to rehabilitate Star Wars in the popular consciousness. They absolutely, with this film, have to bring it "back" to the people after the general distrust and rejection of the past 20 years of what's happened to the product, where not only have these new films disturbed people immensely, but the originals have been defiled.

In a sense, I expect that once The Force Awakens does the heavy lifting of bringing people back to the fold, VIII will have more free reign to go "out there". I hope so, anyway, but I don't think you hire Rian Johnson to do more Abrams-style remixing.

 

Holy sith, how did I never pick up on that before?

 

Your argument is a bit silly, in order to rehabilitate Starwars (because the success of TCW cartoon series proved otherwise ?) they have to make a rehash of ANH ...

Why not simply make a good fun film with engaging characters instead ?

 

If you think that the TCW show has mended the damage done by the prequels and the special editions then you have grossly estimated its impact and viewership.

Abrams and Kennedy are drawing on what they know that people still hold dear and repackaging it. This does not preclude The Force Awakens from being a good fun film with engaging characters... if anything it increases its chances since it's using the best boilerplate possible.

 

The number of people who saw and were disappointed by the Prequels is an order of magnitude bigger than the number of people who saw and liked TCW. The fact that most of TCW's fanbase is, at best, in their tweens doesn't give them a lot of pull in terms of public perception.

I will agree, I want a good film with fun, original characters, too. But, as the most recent teaser demonstrates, Abrams is making a hard appeal to Star Wars authenticity here. We can probably expect a story that could fit into the same rough block outline as ANH, because that is what people want and expect (outside of this board, did any fans really want to see the Republic Senate in TPM?). ]

Then again, ANH didn't have the Falcon racing through a crashed SSD in any part of it, so who the kriff knows what's going on? We're trying to puzzle out a 2 hour film based on about a minute of actual footage.

 

There's already a hint at something not really in ANH, which is... I'm guessing a very personal motivation for the villain. If indeed he's the one in possession of Vader's helmet.

 

For me, anthology film would mean an episode film, which this most probably won't be (they'd go for an ensemble instead for the one principal star they're presenting right now). But my mind is boggled by the idea that with SW, you couldn't say episode film because, you know, Episode.

And having this as the "SW version of Zero Dark Thirty" definitely makes it sound as if someone's pondering playing the "different genres" card again, just like with the Marvel movies. Has anyone claimed yet that Ant-Man will be inspired by classic heist movies even though it's all CGI characters punching and shooting in the end?

I think bringing "authenticity" into the discussion is a genius move, but I guess you won't like the reason why I think so. For me, "authenticity" is such a hollow marketing term these days. It's just another style-over-substance approach that's claiming rules where there are none.

The thing SW has to do right now is become cool again (which is what Abrams did with Trek, as well, but I think Trek has more potential to alienate hardcore fans once it's cool). SW still was very popular with a huge audience, but it wasn't cool. Officially, it was just more of those sci-fi-effects films. By an old man who hadn't done any cool films in some time. Going for a roster of promising sci-fi directors is certainly a good move, but that's still a nerd angle to it. I didn't see people flock to see Godzilla simply because Monsters is awesome and that dude from Breaking Bad was in it - it was just one more of those sci-fi effects films.

I have to wonder, though, if this new wave of movies will be remembered better because A) they're in the dichotomy of "was bad, will be good now"; B) thanks to Marvel/Big Bang Theory the public is more open to sci-fi again, like in the 70s/80s; C) authenticity/nostalgia/retromania are at a good point for these movies to work; D) they're actually so much better and will all win Oscars for best script?

Now, here's a question: If they'll go for different genres, starting with a movie that goes for Zero-Dark-Thirty-and-gritty with X-Wings, will that still be authentic? Will that be authentic because there's an X-Wing? Or because dark and gritty war movies are cooler/more mainstream than space opera?

The first character to be revealed is a female rebel commando named Bria Tharen. There won't be a Jedi in this movie but a former stormtrooper named Kyle Katarn who wasn't even beginning on his Jedi path during that timeframe. What else do we need?

 

Well the only thing that's going to mend the damage of SE is an unaltered edition on Blue Ray. I have the DVD version with that edition on the bonus disc and I have no interest in buying another version whether it's Darth Vader going Nooo during one of the most epic moments in RTJ and the OT as a whole.

The PT is a different matter. Like iv said before the issue is one of execution rather than anything. Like who are the Sith why do they want revenge against the Jedi and why are there only 2. Lucas never bothered to explain.

But regardless, people are going to go see this film. It's a new Starwars film after all.
The real issue is if people will be bothered to want to come back and see another or just shrug their shoulders and think meh il give it a miss if it's ESB reduex.

You see a lot of fanboys used the same argument a over his 1st Trek reboot. Which does not hold up well. when I saw it was flashy (or Lensy if you prefer) and some good action but that didn't stop me noticing the huge plot holes in the story or crazy character actions and it being a rehash of Wrath of Khan (he went the whole hog and bought Khan back for the next one with the same plot) with the revenge plot line. More and more apparent as it ages.
Com spare that to the OT which is pretty timeless.

The issue is more Disney going to be putting to much Starwars stuff out with multiple spin-offs with people just getting sick of it.

 

I hope it's not Zero Dark Thirty because that was immoral and inaccurate torture porn. To base a film off that, they may as well do Birth of a Nation while they are at it.

 

...Gotta say, as far as authenticity goes, you just lost some.

 

So many issues to address there, so little time.

This "people will be sick of it" has not been evidenced yet, it's been 15 years solid of comic book movies and in the first 5 years there was a lot of really woeful crap and now it's bigger than ever. There was literally about 6 decades worth of Westerns being in vogue and 50 years of Bond films which have even less variation than Star Wars but people have only sporadically gotten "sick" of it. It's a made up complaint, totally fictional and not supported by anything.

The nature of the problems with the PT have almost nothing to do with it - they are derided, and so Abrams and Kennedy are going down a path to deliberately avoid everything that is now known to be a no-no. You need only hear the massive cheer at the announcement of practical sets and effects.

People will go and see it regardless, yes. That being said if it looked like more prequel tomfoolery and a lot of unfamiliar stuff with the Star Wars brand slapped on it you would get a hell of a lot less people on board than you will by offering people the promise of original trilogy touchstones. Trust me, if the film is good, there will be bucketloads of critical praise chiefly about it recapturing the feel of those first two films.

If you want to talk about Star Trek there you have a great example for what I'm talking about though - the first Abrams installment struck a bit of a nerve and made this franchise financially viable again. If there's a good Trek film or show in the nearby future it will be because of the '09 film resuscitating something that was conclusively dead. As for the film aging, literally every Star Trek film ages badly, including (especially!) the good ones. They're designed to be topical rather than a broader mythic setting that you get in Star Wars.

Wish you'd come up with that first as you would have precluded any need for further reply.

 

That is hilarious.

Anthology is a poetic term (it acquired its current meaning after the corpus of ancient Greek poetry came down to us under that name). It basically means "flower-talk" and is supposed to signify "a wreath woven of poems". "Star Wars Chronicles" on the other hand? That $%&@ sounds manly.

Every film made since 1915 is based on Birth of Nation. It's unfortunate that the most influential movie ever made is about how awesome Klansmen are, but cinema has to live with that fact (the other most influential movie is about how awesome Soviets are, which I guess is fair).

 

The thing SW has to do right now is become cool again (which is what Abrams did with Trek, as well, but I think Trek has more potential to alienate hardcore fans once it's cool). SW still was very popular with a huge audience, but it wasn't cool. Officially, it was just more of those sci-fi-effects films. By an old man who hadn't done any cool films in some time. Going for a roster of promising sci-fi directors is certainly a good move, but that's still a nerd angle to it. I didn't see people flock to see Godzilla simply because Monsters is awesome and that dude from Breaking Bad was in it - it was just one more of those sci-fi effects films.

I have to wonder, though, if this new wave of movies will be remembered better because A) they're in the dichotomy of "was bad, will be good now"; B) thanks to Marvel/Big Bang Theory the public is more open to sci-fi again, like in the 70s/80s; C) authenticity/nostalgia/retromania are at a good point for these movies to work; D) they're actually so much better and will all win Oscars for best script?

Now, here's a question: If they'll go for different genres, starting with a movie that goes for Zero-Dark-Thirty-and-gritty with X-Wings, will that still be authentic? Will that be authentic because there's an X-Wing? Or because dark and gritty war movies are cooler/more mainstream than space opera?[/quote]

Maybe it is a hollow marketing term. However, we live in an age of sequels, where most of our media is self-referential. On this board, of all places, technical and thematic continuity is something that we applaud. That's what I meant by "authenticity." It seems to be something that Abrams is consciously striving for in terms of his movie feeling like the Original trilogy.

I didn't say I wanted Zero Dark Thirty in a galaxy far, far away. I meant that the military action scenes in Zero Dark Thirty were well shot and exciting. I did not give a moral endorsement of the film.

 

Another thing that's significant about 'Anthology' than 'Stand-Alone' is that it leaves open the possibility for direct followups to characters/stories established in certain films. Like story arcs in TCW, which has actually been described by LFL as an "Anthology Series".