ST Episode VII to return to 'grittier roots'

J.J Abrams dropped a few interesting tidbits about Episode VII in a recent interview by the Times newspaper (UK)

J.J was shown this video, which sets out the golden rules of the new films from a fan perspective:


"I would say that [the video conveys] a feeling that we share very much," he said.

"I loved how Star Wars had that sense of a world far beyond the borders of what you can see and have been told," he said. "It's one of the things it did so brilliantly."

"If you watch the first movie, you don't actually know exactly what the Empire is trying to do. They're going to rule by fear - but you don't know what their end game is.

"The beauty of that movie was that it was an unfamiliar world, and yet you wanted to see it expand and to see where it went."


Source: http://uk.movies.yahoo.com/j-j-abrams-star-wars-could-return-grittier-205300724.html

So do you think J.J is taking the Sequel Trilogy in the right direction? In addition do you think J.J is doing the right thing by moving away from the more political and scientific themes of the Prequels, and moving back into the frontier?

 

As an OT fan hearing things like this is a big sigh of relief, but I found it interesting that he aknowledges the elephant in the room (In the full article those quotes appear in) and that's that the PT has its share of fans; especially with the 25 and under crowd. He doesn't want to alienate them by blasting the PT, and the likelyhood is that there will have to be some concessions made for them here and there.

But in general, yeah, this was the sort of thing I wanted to hear from him for sure.

 

What a load of Bantha fodder

 

... ?

That video is getting a ridiculous amount of publicity.

 

I posted this over in the Casting Rumors thread when this first hit, but since we have a dedicated thread it bears repeating, plus I added a few notes. I frankly think this video is misguided and IF J.J. really subscribes to the "Star Wars Rules" video, then the production does have problems. Let's take the rules 1 by 1.

1. The setting is the frontier. Really??? I never once thought that growing up watching the OT. Heck even the original film implies a much bigger galaxy. "If there's a bright center to the universe then your on the planet it's farthest from." Luke referring to an off world Academy and Tatooine as a rock, implying there's a much bigger galaxy out there. Tatooine is the frontier... not the galaxy. Heck the whole Death Star conference scene obliterates the notion that the Star Wars universe is some kind of desolate frontier with discussions of a Senate and regional governors. Leia's from a royal house, again implying some sort of larger almost feudal system in place. Dantooine is "too remote" to make an effective demonstration of the Empire's power... again implying there are much more populated areas of the galaxy. Point #1 is just silly.

2. The future is old. Again I have no clue what the author of this video is talking about. If he's talking about the used, and worn look of the OT, that has been argued to death. The PT is the Republic prior to the fall... things are still nice and shiny. If you want worn... go back to Tatooine. In all of the Tatooine scenes, items are worn and makeshift; there's definitely a used vibe to Anakin's pod racer. I'm just curious why the video author thinks the seat of galactic power wouldn't be shiny and newer looking compared to the outskirts of the galaxy?

3. The Force is mysterious. Actually the Force is quite mysterious in the PT... probably even more so than in the OT. Right from the get go we learn there are clearly theological differences of opinion regarding the Force itself. Qui Gon speaks about the "Living Force," and based on Kenobi's response that's clearly not in line with traditional Jedi dogma. Qui Gon and Yoda impart almost contradictory lessons about how to approach life... Qui Gon tells Anakin to "feel don't think," meanwhile Yoda teaches a line of thought that personal attachments and feelings can cloud your judgement... in particular I love Yoda's discussion with Anakin in ROTS about losing loved ones... some pretty heady stuff there.

Of course what #3 is referring to is midichlorians, which of course the original video producer is confusing for the Force. As has been stated numerous time midichlorians are not the Force and are only a gateway to use of the Force. It was an tangible way to quantify ability to use the Force... that's all.

4. Star Wars isn't cute... Really? So back when I was a kid, all those little 5 and 6 year old boys and girls I knew who had R2-D2 t-shirts, toys, or posters were attracted to R2 because he WASN'T cute. Or all of those "Awwwwwwww's" and giggles I heard when R2 fell over after being shot by the Jawas or when R2 was removed from Luke's X-Wing to a chorus of more "Awwwwwwww's" was again because R2-D2 was NOT cute, right? Star Wars has ALWAYS made appeals to younger viewers... Chewie is cute (especially his dog like reaction to the Dianoga after the heroes escape the trash compactor), the droids are cute. And Lucasfilm has always marketed to little kids... yes even back during the OT days.

This point alone probably says more about the emotional/maturity state of the original author of the video. For some reason he feels embarrassed, at his age, to be associated with something that the vast majority of average people i9n this country view as children's movies. So he has to go to great lengths in both time and effort to create the video in order to separate himself as a "mature fan" who remembers the bygone days when Star Wars was "mature." It's revisionism...nothing more. I'm a 46 year old grown man with two kids and a grandkid on the way who proudly declares "I'm a Star Wars fan!" I still collect the comics, play the FFG Star Wars RPG, play video games and read the books... oh and I'm a huge Disney animation fan and a fan of older Walt Disney films, and the Disneyland park... does that make me a big kid... You bet it does, and I very appreciative that George has given me a vehicle which allows me to recapture a bit of that magic I felt as a kid.

As far as the assertion that the OT is more "gritty" than the PT I call BS. Let's see a young child is taken from his only parent to basically become a pawn in a battle between the Light and Dark Side of the Force. In film two his mother is basically raped and murdered by Tusken Raiders, he then turns his anger on the Tuskens, beheading and killing an entire tribe, including women and children... later in the film he loses an arm. In the third film his conventional understanding of the galaxy and good and evil is turned on its head and because of his fear of losing his wife he knowingly joins forces with the Emperor, and promptly assists in the murder of Mace Windu. He then marches on the Jedi Temple and commits mass murder, including the killing of children, then turns around and assassinates the remaining leaders of the CIS, even after they surrender and beg for mercy. Next he essentially murders his wife (sure we are arguing semantics here), falls into a lava pit, emerging as a burned mass of flesh, hell bent on revenge.

Yeah, sure that's not "gritty" or "edgy."


Yancy

 

My 15 year old nephew and I debated last night what the new trilogy should be like. He is a HUGE fan of the PT (loves Jar Jar), and I of course prefer the OT. We both clearly have different ideas. JJ has his work cut out for him if he wants to please both fan bases.

 

I love the heroic image of JJA as Han Solo blowing Jar Jar's head off. JJA, the same guy who populated an entire movie, Cloverfield, with characters more annoying than Jar Jar on a sugar bender & who also introduced this amazing new deadly serious character to the Star Trek universe:





JJ, our savior

 

I've never thought of Star Wars as "gritty" even when taking into consideration the used future visual design of the OT or the more weighty themes of the PT. So yeah, it's a bit disheartening if Abrams sees that rules video as an essential blueprint, but at the very least I'm glad that he himself never uses the phrase "gritty" here.

 

I'm not the hyperbolic type that would say something like "That video is everything that is wrong with a good portion of Star Wars fans," but if I were...

 

The only thing worse than the amount of attention that childish video gets is that it reached and is approved by the person at the helm of the sequel trilogy. Everything I've seen regarding Episode VII is a blind fan-service campaign to catter a few vocal, frustrated OT fans who hate the PT. It says a lot about their lack of originality and unwillingness to take risks by playing "safe". It also shows an huge lack of knowledge about what Star Wars is when saying that they share the feeling that video conveys.

 

To my mind JJ didn't say anything, really. He sounds pretty diplomatic and non committal in those quotes. It's hardly a ringing endorsement. He tends to agree diplomatically with his interviewer when put on the spot. And if you watch the "Legacy" documentary or "ILM Creating the Impossible" it's clear that he appreciates a lot of things about the PT; he also got Damon Lindelof (I think it was him) to give The Clone Wars a chance. He's hardly an OT apologist, the strongest remark he's made on the two trilogies is that he's closer to the OT 'cause he grew up with it. So it's basically the same old RLM gripes with a polite, restrained, vague, generalized 'agreement' from JJA.

 

I don't believe people should be concerned about what JJ is stating per se... I'm not sure he even believes it himself to be honest. I think JJ is probably quite a pragmatic filmmaker (and I'm not particularly a fan of his)... he and KK are not going to make a film that alienates the millions of audience goers under the age of 25. Him taking about the OT in such a manner is just a way of enticing older audiences who may not readily rush to see a new Star Wars film.

 

Star Wars has gritty roots?

 

The BLUE LINE OF DEATH which makes any of JJ's films unwatchable for me - they honesty give me a headache.

And I HATE that damned video...

 

Yeah, this is what I thought. I would assume they're referring to the "used future" angle. Probably.

 

"Gritty" for it's day and age, one could argue. Today, in the minds of most people gritty usually means something completely different, more extreme. Ultra-realistic, blood, gore, sex, etc. Something can easily be "gritty" without those things. It's about the overall tone, not what is explicitly shown on the screen, as far as I'm concerned.
*shrug*

 

Good God I really dislike that video. They take aspects of the original trilogy that we love and think THOSE were the sole blueprints for why we loved them. In reality...those aspects we love stem from the story and the characters...which we loved more. All 4 of those "points" were organically woven from the original trilogy's story. They weren't put in place as RULES and then had the story catered around them.

Whoever made this video seem to have a very surface-level appreciation of Star Wars.

 

Who can ever forget these unforgettably gritty scenes from the OT?!?!











It was scenes like this that made kids beg for Kenner action figures and read goofy Marvel comics and run around the backyard pretending to be Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader. What fans remember most from the OT were the incredibly intense, brilliantly written dramatic scenes that laid bare the dark side of human nature. What was up with that PT? Whoever thought SW was family viewing with lots of humor and entertainment value? Crazy old rich Lucas! Let's hope JJA doesn't lose sight of this fact. As we all know, SW was successful because the 70's was such a time of unbridled optimism, what cinema needed was a gritty dose of reality! So man-up and give us the goods JJA! The opening scene should be Han Solo Jr. striding into a bar and just blowing a Gungan's head off, he then says to the terrified patrons, "I shot first! Deal with it."

 

Star Wars has never been a "frontier" story to me.

In fact, what makes Star Wars an epic saga is that it interweaves a personal, character driven opera with the story of the galaxy at large. Those two elements have ALWAYS been there. People forget about how many mentions of government and society there are in ANH, even if what we actually see is fairly limited. The climax of Return of the Jedi is the greatest example of this. It is literally a juxtaposition of a family drama with a story of rebels fighting for freedom.

The prequels only extended those two contrasting elements, by giving us the story of society's downfall intermixed with the personal fall of a tragic hero. If you happen to think the prequels didn't do those things particularly well, fine. But that doesn't mean that sense of scale should never again be attempted in a Star Wars film. When it comes down to it, I don't think anybody would be happy if Episode 7 took place entirely on some backwater wilderness planet, and we never get to see what's happening with the new republic, or the rebuilding of the Jedi order. Even the most virulent prequel-hater would miss those elements.

 

I was hoping JJ would stay off the internet altogether when making the ST.

 

Good posts - I think that is it exactly... Some people do seem to have a very "surface level appreciation" of Star Wars without ever really comprehending or acknowledging the significance of underlying mythology, story, characters. If I were JJ I'd concentrate first and foremost on getting a great story/great characters into a script, rather than worrying about, or paying lip service to, what are largely irrelevant considerations such as 'gritty', 'frontier' etc.

 

I think that's what he's doing. I agree that his comments were just lip service to reassure non-PT fans. I've got issues with the PT (though I enjoy lots in each film) but adhering to those rules won't make for three good star wars films, especially as the OT also break most of those rules.

 

I was born in 1987, so I'm not really qualified to talk at all, but the impression I've always got was that people loved Star Wars because it was such a breath of fresh air from the gritty movies of the 1970s. It was fun and exciting and whimsical and swashbuckling, and unashamed in its straight-down-the-line depiction of good and evil. Empire may have been darker, but it was still a fantasy with plenty of light moments.

While I enjoy more morally grey stories like The Wire, and I'm all for more complexity and depth in Star Wars, one of the main things that appeals to me about the franchise is the underlying belief that good people can accomplish great things, and evil people will be undone by their own flaws. Hokey? Maybe. Inspirational? Definitely.

Or to put it another way: I want Star Wars to be for kids again.

 

Lots of excellent points made - thanks guys.

 

That definitely was the intention when making ANH.