main
side
curve
  1. In Memory of LAJ_FETT: Please share your remembrances and condolences HERE

ST The Development Of The Sequel Trilogy

Discussion in 'Sequel Trilogy' started by Artoo-Dion , Sep 14, 2017.

Tags:
  1. TCF-1138

    TCF-1138 Anthology/Fan Films/NSA Mod & Ewok Enthusiast star 6 Staff Member Manager

    Registered:
    Sep 20, 2002
    Well, yes? Has anyone claimed anything else?
     
  2. Martoto77

    Martoto77 Jedi Master star 5

    Registered:
    Aug 6, 2016
    I was referring to the several posts citing Lucas's perceived disdain for "Disney" electing to "doing it for the fans."
     
    Satipo and Darth Downunder like this.
  3. redxavier

    redxavier Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 23, 2003
    Yeah, that point doesn't hold up to much if any scrutiny. Every Star Wars product we've seen since 1977 has had fan service. People either mind or don't mind depending on whether they like it or not. RO is almost entirely fan service for existence yet gets a pass by the same people who think a second shot of Finn holding a remote ball is too much.
     
  4. Tristan the Trilobite

    Tristan the Trilobite Jedi Youngling

    Registered:
    Sep 8, 2017
    redxavier
    Lol, I'm one of those, though I doubt it's generally the same people. The fan service is strong with both movies. Yet, TFA annoys me while I consider RO a valuable contribution. Rationally put, the difference lies in nuance.

    TFA is entirely meant to be a retro film for the fans, and thus fan service as a whole, starting with repainted CT-designs and culminating in a plot beat by plot beat repetition (JJ: "rip off") of - mostly - ANH and elements of the other CT films as well as reused character types(Tarkin/Hux, Vader/Kylo, Palps/Snoke, Yoda/Maz etc).

    RO has several cringe worthy fan service moments as well: the cantina thugs and the droids bumping into the plot, maybe the AT AT cameo, a Calamari admiral or even Vader (creating a plot hole). But RO tells a genuine, fresh, war-film genre story adding gravitas to the franchise as a whole – it feels unique. Also, despite RO being a ANH period/companion piece they where wonderfully creative with it: with several completely new ship/vehicle ideas like the B-Wing transport and more sophisticated world building.
     
    KSennia, Jo Lucas, Darkslayer and 4 others like this.
  5. Krueger

    Krueger Chosen One star 5

    Registered:
    Aug 9, 2004
    How does Vader's appearance create a plot hole? I thought he was used very carefully in RO.
     
    Jo Lucas and Darkslayer like this.
  6. Tristan the Trilobite

    Tristan the Trilobite Jedi Youngling

    Registered:
    Sep 8, 2017
    Jeez we will derail the thread, in a nutshell, before I get blasted:

    RO: Vaders pursues those rebels carring the DS plans in sight killing them one by one, and with threir combined forces they (physically) manage to hand over the plans on the ship (TantiveIV). Vader watches it escape.

    ANH: In ANH he states several times that thr plans were beamed to "this ship" (Tantive IV), and that he traced the plan transmissions to Leia's ship.

    Vader to captain: Where are those transmissions you
    intercepted?
    We intercepted no transmissions.
    Aaah... This is a consular ship.
    Were on a diplomatic mission.

    Vader to Leia: Several transmissions were beamed to this
    ship by Rebel spies. I want to know
    what happened to the plans they sent
    you.

    Vader: I have traced the Rebel spies to
    her.

    QED: It's a logical inconsistency (plot hole) as you need to fill this gap/contradiction with info not set out in plot and dialogue (e.g., Leia changed ships during her escape and transmitted thr plans instead of taking them with her, which renders it even more absurd).

    The likely reason for the plot hole was that this scene was a reshoot and speed often kills.
     
    Darth Nerdling likes this.
  7. TCF-1138

    TCF-1138 Anthology/Fan Films/NSA Mod & Ewok Enthusiast star 6 Staff Member Manager

    Registered:
    Sep 20, 2002
    Yeah, let's get back on topic now.
     
  8. Martoto77

    Martoto77 Jedi Master star 5

    Registered:
    Aug 6, 2016
    That's not a logical gap or a contradiction. It's semantics.
     
    El_Machete12 and Darth Downunder like this.
  9. {Quantum/MIDI}

    {Quantum/MIDI} Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Dec 21, 2015
    His philosophy wasn't to compromise his visions for the fans. Disney has said to revolve their movies around the fans.

    Sure, Lucas did some which is "OK". It just depends on how much was used and/or if they entire movie was to give the feeling of fan service. From my perspective, because of his movies having a large mixed opinion in the fanbase due to his "polarizing view" of SW, I think it's quite safe to say that he did not make such a sacrifice.
     
  10. Martoto77

    Martoto77 Jedi Master star 5

    Registered:
    Aug 6, 2016
    What exactly do you mean by the bolded part? Do you have a quote from "Disney" that explicates this "revolving" and their desire or design to "compromise a vision".

    Where and how was it defined what the "OK" amount of this "some" ("some" what?) was? And what amount constitutes a "sacrifice" or the amount that makes a viewer feel they are just being serviced as a fan?
     
    Darth Downunder likes this.
  11. Artoo-Dion

    Artoo-Dion Manager Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Jun 9, 2009
    There seems to be this need to dichotomise the situation, putting Lucas on the side of pure artistry while Kennedy et al just make soulless cash-grabs. It's pure bunk.
     
  12. comet1440

    comet1440 Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 25, 2004
    Because Lucas was pure artistry. He didn't create Star Wars for money. He had a story he wanted to tell, a grand vision. He made it come to life. When Fox agreed to finance ANH, he didn't allow any comprise on the film he wanted to make. The studio thought it would flop. He stuck to his guns and ended up making one of the greatest films of all time. Hard work, dedication, artistry.

    Disney is a corporation. A public company with no soul. Their goal is to make money. They didn't spend 4 billion dollars on Star Wars for artistry. Star Wars is a product to them. The founders of Disney are dead, now their only "vision", their only reason to exist is to make money. All corporations are evil. You can't separate money and greed from evil. You will always get the same result. The decisions a corporation will make will be dictated by how to make money, over anything else.

    I don't see how this is controversial, or why some seem so reluctant to accept that evil is a part of the situation. That's how things work. Humans are naturally evil, if they were not, then life would be good. There would be no wars. The world would be a good place. But that's not the topic of this thread.

    It's ok to adopt a view of Disney being just a souless corporation making souless movies only concerned with greed, and I honestly find it hard to understand why people would disagree with that. It seems like all the mods on this site will defend Disney at any cost. It's as if you are not allowed to be a mod on this site and be against Disney at the same time, but that's just the conspiracy side of me talking.

    George Lucas just wanted to tell the story of Star Wars, his story, and he did that. How can you defend Disney after he himself called them "white slavers", and said they didn't want to use his Story. In my personal opinion, the Anti-Disney view is the correct one.
     
  13. Seagoat

    Seagoat Former Manager star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Jan 25, 2013
    ....Damn, dude. Bit jaded, don't you think?

    Fact is, even with the Art of TFA book, we don't know how much influence Disney execs have on LFL/the content of the films. It's possible we never will. To place credit/blame on Disney itself for anything is, in my opinion, fallacious until/if we learn the exacts
     
    BigAl6ft6 and Satipo like this.
  14. Artoo-Dion

    Artoo-Dion Manager Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Jun 9, 2009
    Well, that's the problem in a nutshell.
     
    BigAl6ft6 and Darth Nave like this.
  15. {Quantum/MIDI}

    {Quantum/MIDI} Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Dec 21, 2015
    I didn't stutter nor state that.
    Where it was OK is when Lucas didn't commit the entire premise of his films to the fans.

    Going to bed but look back some pages on Lucas's quote on Disney wanting to make a "retro" movie for the fans.
     
  16. Darth Downunder

    Darth Downunder Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    Aug 5, 2001
    In an even smaller nutshell before I get blasted, we should just chalk this up to Vader being economical with his language. The Tantive was docked within the Profundity when the plans were beamed up to them. So as far as Vader was concerned the two ships were one & the same. It's just verbal shorthand. Sounds catchier than saying "several transmissions were beamed to the Rebel ship you were docked within & then transferred aboard this ship by Rebel spies!". Vader ain't gonna split hairs like that.
    There's an amusing irony with Lucas (& his fans) using the term "retro" as a negative. Given the entire premise of Star Wars was a homage to the old fashioned "retro" serials of the 30's & 40's. Same applies to Indiana Jones. Doesn't make retro movies? His entire career is built on them!
    Of course not. That's why he glued both halves of Darth Maul together & wheeled him out to sell his latest cartoon series.
    Didn't he? There's a tonne of evidence to the contrary. As one example, here's a description of GL's motives by John Milius, his lifelong friend & confidant. A guy he saw fit to give a % of the gross of ANH such was his level of friendship & support.
    Did he? That's the story & the myth he deliberately built up over the years, which a lot of fans bought into. Since completing the Saga he's come clean about that:

    "Congratulations on pulling off an amazing show (Lost). Don’t tell anyone…but when ‘Star Wars’ first came out, I didn’t know where it was going either. The trick is to pretend you’ve planned the whole thing out in advance. Throw in some father issues and references to other stories — let’s call them homages — and you’ve got a series."
    - George Lucas http://collider.com/george-lucas-letter-lost-damon-lindelof-carlton-cuse/

    Getting back to TFA, I suspect that after the ST is complete Lucasfilm will open the book in more detail regarding its development. Perhaps we'll even get to see this fabled outline that Lucas submitted. During this ST era I imagine they'd rather keep that under wraps, for fear or endless debate about which story ideas are "legitimate" or which ones are better or worse than what's on screen. Post Ep IX is when I hope & expect more transparency on the matter. Until then, the information this person has posted to Reddit is a great resource & more revealing than I would've thought possible. Some excellent research here.
     
  17. Martoto77

    Martoto77 Jedi Master star 5

    Registered:
    Aug 6, 2016
    Do you have the proof or statement of someone's commitment of their entire premise of the films to the fan?

    And by statements, I mean ones that support your assertion that "Disney has said to revolve their movies around the fans."(sic). A quote from George Lucas is not "Disney" having said anything.


    It's neither here nor there, since George Lucas hasn't said anything since actually seeing the movie.

    Also. What about this "some"? You're quantifying something in your argument but not stating what it is quantity of or what the specific quantity is. You'll need to explain it before just proceeding or repeating it.
     
    Satipo likes this.
  18. Artoo-Dion

    Artoo-Dion Manager Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Jun 9, 2009
    Let's not forget that this thread is about the development of TFA and not "Are corporations evil?" or any other sort of debate about Lucas vs. The Man.
     
  19. {Quantum/MIDI}

    {Quantum/MIDI} Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Dec 21, 2015
    "What about all the times that Lucas points out doing things for the fans in the Prequel Trilogy? Like the clones banging their heads on things. Or having the Wookie planet and "old friend" Chewbacca (after insisting that the Wookies were only meant to represent a primitive culture that overcomes technology, which he had done with the Ewoks - in ROTS the Wookies don't seem to have a problem with technology"-Marty

    "Also, What about this "some"? You're quantifying something in your argument but not stating what it is quantity of or what the specific quantity is. You'll need to explain it before just proceeding or repeating it."-Also Marty

    I thought you understood what I meant(I did provide it). I explained where Lucas didn't use a lot of the callbacks constantly to older SW films, in the entire reason for it to pleasure the fans. This is what I mean by "some". You're arguement were;

    "Well what about the aspects where Lucas does things for the fans?"

    Granted, I probably should have grabbed the specifics of your quote but I just assumed you knew what I was referring to. Either way, I'm repeating myself due to the fact that there isn't much I can do to change up my statement. That was my answer(am I just misunderstanding you?)

    "What exactly do you mean by the bolded part? Do you have a quote from "Disney" that explicates this "revolving" and their desire or design to "compromise a vision".

    It was quite recently discussed.

    "They looked at the stories, and they said, 'We want to make something for the fans,'" Lucas said of Disney. "They decided they didn't want to use those stories, they decided they were going to do their own thing."-Lucas.
     
  20. Artoo-Dion

    Artoo-Dion Manager Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Jun 9, 2009
    Does this look like the PT vs. ST thread? No? That's because it's not. This isn't even the PT vs. ST forum.
     
  21. Martoto77

    Martoto77 Jedi Master star 5

    Registered:
    Aug 6, 2016
    Goodbye.
     
  22. Visivious Drakarn

    Visivious Drakarn Jedi Master star 3

    Registered:
    Apr 20, 2013
    I find nothing ironic here.
    Lucas' SW movies evolved, I think that's obvious: ANH is very simple movie, ROTS is a culmination of a trilogy and a centerpoint of the saga. It's not the 30's and 40's approach that he perhaps didn't like, but regressing to ANH's visual and narrative style.

    Yes... I doubt that. The Making of book is on hold, home edition extras barely mentioned Lucas (and the development of TFA) and informations from another people, J. W. Rinzler, perhaps, are not allowed. I expected a lot from them - some informations or videos of how the ST came to be, what part of the story from 1-6 will they extend into that era, what ideas will they explore, but we got just glimpses and selected informations.
    Remember when everything was public and honest? When Lucas said that he may have gone too far with this, and people took that as an example that he knew his three movies will suck?

    Again, I doubt that.

    OK, a couple of words here.
    I had no problems with Luke hiding, girl living on a junkyard planet or neo-empire with a superweapon. The ideas had a potential, they needed screenwriter with a vision and, in the end, were poorly executed. Han regressing to a smuggler is... Well... Not my taste.
    Leia in a position of power - this I like. But there's no mention of Resistance in that phase. It was all Republic - it's military base and it's superweapon. So, was Leia, in Lucas' head, one of high ranking politicians in the Republic? The idea of destroying the Republic, making the Rebels Resistance fight a more powerful enemy was a very cheap way for the audience to sympathize our heroes.
    It states that it was J. J. who wanted ANH imagery and perhaps that's why George left. Perhaps. His ideas of a unique ST style being reduced to something he's done 40 years ago. I find this very ironic. Many say that George is an idea man, that his stories are great, but ruined by bad script. So far no one has said that thing for TFA which is, to me, prime example of that.
     
    ezekiel22x and {Quantum/MIDI} like this.
  23. Artoo-Dion

    Artoo-Dion Manager Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Jun 9, 2009
    I personally think Kylo Ren is a masterstroke in terms of ideas. He elevates the entire film into something thematically rich.

    I'm still going through the Art Of book. Does anyone know when Kylo Ren first appears (i.e. a fallen Solo)?
     
  24. {Quantum/MIDI}

    {Quantum/MIDI} Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Dec 21, 2015
    To an extent, I do agree. Kylo and Finn, add a depth to TFA that I will admit had me a bit interested.
     
    Darkslayer and Artoo-Dion like this.
  25. Gigoran Monk

    Gigoran Monk Jedi Grand Master star 5

    Registered:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Wait. When Lucas was involved, a lot of design work had already happened and it was less OT-inspired than what we got? If that's what you're implying, is the Art Book the source for it?

    Also, if indeed the most significant difference between an Abrams and Lucas TFA would have been aesthetic, I'm glad Abrams' vision won out. TFA could have used a few more unique environments (as RO pulled off beautifully), but a TFA with Felucias and planets like that would have likely been visually worse than what we got, IMO.