ST JJ Abrams to direct Episode VII

I don't know actually, if you can pass on the torch to a likeable next generation and come up with a compelling villain and conflict you can effectively reboot and keep going. Star Wars (done right) is basically a cinematic licence to print money so they won't ever want to wrap it up, so long as it's successful. I can imagine each trilogy being it's own fairly self-contained story that will cast shadows into the next part of the saga. If people lose interest, then they'll wrap the story up.

I think SW has always been about the struggle between good and evil, and that's a story that's always been with us and always will be relevant.

Having said that, if they can keep the saga evolving in ways that gives us new understanding of previous episodes that would be great.

 

I'll go along with that. Let's say that it might be the last of the GL saga trilogies. Although he did say that he had a treasure trove of stories he handed over to KK.

 

Episode 32: The 8th New Hope.

 

It's so tricky with GL to know exactly what he had down on paper. I've heard that the ideas he initially put down and that Arndt leapt off from was only about a page. Ardnt was the one that put together the 40/50 page doc for the whole trilogy (I'm sure with constant back and forth with GL and KK). That rumour could of course be way off base but it may also be near the mark. There was that guy who said he had read the outlines for the two sequel trilogies back in the day so maybe he did have it all mapped out.

 

Which brings me to one of the worst possible outcomes: I-VI loosing their meaning. Who cares about Palpatine if there's always a new Sith Lord?

 

Well, there's more than one way of looking at it. Do you actually lose more meaning by resurrecting Palps somehow?

Personally I love Palps so if they can find a way to make it work and not suck and bring him back then I'll keep an open mind. I also hope that they can come up with other villains besides Palps and Vader. I mean, taking real life as an example, it's not as if history hasn't had it's share of world class a-holes in the past. It's not as if there haven't been terrible villains since Hitler (or in fact that make his evil any less horrific). I'm sure they can come up with somebody worthy. I actually felt that each of the PT villains had the potential to be right up there with the OT villains had they been developed further (I realize GL was trying not to steal Vader's thunder).

 

What I was saying I don't want would be like a new Fuhrer and another holocaust.

 

Which is understandable.

 

Rewatched "Super 8" yesterday, still really liked it a lot (those last 5 minutes are freakin' genius), Abrams does a damn good Spielberg impression so I'm fairly certain he'll be able to nail Star Wars style easily.

 

Just because it's a similar baddie doesn't mean the last one wasn't bad. I mean, Stalin did some pretty horrible things. We don't say he's less bad because Hitler had already been there, done that. I mean, they used the Death Star twice in three movies - the cynic in me says it's safe to say we get a new Darth in 2015.

 

Agreed that Abrams does a fairly decent job at impressions, but that's one of my worries for Episode VII. I'd like the film to aim a bit higher than pastiche. Ideally I'm hoping for a new beginning in a manner similar to TPM's style compared to the OT, where there are certainly shades and echoes of what has come before, but for the most part the film feels like an original take on an established universe. I don't want Episode VII to simply feel like part four of the OT or New Trek 3.

 

I agree... I want Ep 7 to feel like SW, of course, but not necessarily like the PT or the OT. I want the ST to have its own feeling within the larger SW feeling.

 

I agree. The way I've always looked at it is that, yes, the PT and the OT are part of the same saga, but they are also different trilogies. They are stand-alone trilogies and should therefore be able to stand on their own two feet. I want the same for the ST, too.

 

I agree too. I want it to fit into the saga but still be able to be its own thing and not a slave to the past films. As I've said before the last thing I want is for the sequel trilogy to try too hard to copy the past films that it doesn't create its own unique identity.

 

SW films have always had a kinetic aspect which I am sure JJ will reproduce very well. Part of SW has also been more mellow reflective sequences in the films. For example Luke on Dagobah, Padme and Anakin on Naboo and Obi Wan on Kamino. In fact, after the opening of ANH it is quite a long section that develops the characters. My hope is that we have all the action sequences but there is time to let the new characters 'breathe'.

 

For me the reflective/room to breath stretches are where Abrams' Trek films utterly fail. Two films in and I feel like I have no idea what everyday life is like in his Trek universe. Hopefully he feels there is more to Star Wars than constant, hyperactive swashbuckling.

 

Abrams Trek movies are his style of Trek movies, and since Star Trek is basically defined by an absence of overarching style (it can basically be any genre) that he can push it more into the action/chase movie.

Going back to Super 8, it's a good example of a much, much slower paced film than anything he's done (the movie, sometimes somewhat jarringly, bounces back between character stuff and sci-fi stuff, but that's much easier to do in a Star Wars movie because the sci-fi elements are inherent to it, not intruding into real-life like it does in Super 8), and there are lots of moments of the main characters just bouncing off each other without being propelled by the narrative, so he knows to let off on the gas when warranted. It just wasn't warranted in his Star Trek movies / Mission Impossible. Watch the "Lost" pilot again that he directed if you don't feel like sitting through all of Super 8, it strikes a great balance of things zipping forward and letting the characters breathe.

 

Can I just point out that having a director ape the style of what has gone before isn't new to this franchise. A New Hope's storytelling and editing was heavily influenced by the late great Kurosawa. That's why the BFI print of The Hidden Fortress has an audio commentary provided by George Lucas. It's also a love letter to pulpy science fiction serials like Flash Gordon. Right down to the opening crawl.





Imitation is in the franchise's blood. So it's not going to rustle my feathers if JJ does borrow from the style of 80's blockbusters and previous Star Wars movies for this endeavor. What matters to me is the end product. And I think he's proven himself capable of producing solid, enjoyable work.

 

Honestly, I hope that JJ Abrams takes a step away from the direction that Lucas has taken the trilogy. I would appreciate more of an adult take on Star Wars - let's face it, the people that really appreciate Star Wars nowadays aren't kids.

 

Somehow, I don't think that is what Disney bought the Star Wars brand for...

 

Honestly Star Wars has to become a family adventure again, like the Goonies or the old Indiana Jones movies, the prequels were way too goofy. I am fine with the adult Star Wars films, but they should rather be spin - offs (like that Zack Snyder thing).

 

If Toy Story 3 is anything to go by, I'm sure Arndt will do a fine job of writing a script that holds appeal across all age ranges.

 

Exactly, it's for all ages and always has been. My six year old son loves it (and he likes the movies more than TCW, too).