Discussion in 'Star Wars: Episode VII and Beyond (Archive)' started by Jimstarwarsfan, Nov 3, 2012.
The ones who own stock. DIS - The Walt Disney Company (NYSE) closed at 49.86 on November 2nd.
The biggest question is: what do SW fans want as a whole? There are so many different opinions on that question that no way can Disney fulfill all those wants, and no matter what they do, 90% of the fanbase will be dissatisfied. So they probably will go and do what they want.
Oh Sorry George Lucas So in your opinion, was The Phantom menace a great Star wars film? I guess they will be calling you up to make the new films. I bow down to your greatness.
Don't post like a ***************** then. And i post like a newbie comment, was only your opinion!!!!
No need to be baiting with name calling. - Adalia Edit
Jimstarwarsfan: I said this earlier in general terms, but there really is no point to this thread because you're deluding yourself if you think that A) Disney's role in the production of these films is going to amount to anything more than simply being responsible for their distribution and B) fan opinion is going to have any effect whatsoever on the production of these films.
It seems as if some fans have this over-inflated view of their own importance and relevance when it comes to these movies, particularly as it concerns the decisions that George Lucas made with the Prequels and with the decision to tweak the 'Middle Trilogy' over the years since its initial theatrical release, which is rather sad. Fan opinion really matters very little to the people making these films, both present and past, which is as it should be.
I totally agree with this. This is why Disney has to stay true to the "design" of how Star Wars is made..
But back to "listening to the fans": no, Disney isn't going to listen to them. Even though I want them to listen to ME, and fans like me, I'd rather take the hit that they'll listen to NO ONE. Seriously? Have you SEEN the ideas people put out on here? I know, in this politically correct, anti-bullying world I can't tell anyone that their idea is stupid. I think the majority of folks have decently good ideas, but there are some pretty awful ideas out there.
Even out of the fans that "seem" to make sense, who would they listen to? The ones that ONLY like the OT and hate the PT? Or the ones that like all 6? Should they listen to the fans that like EU or those who don't want it?
Long story short they can't listen to fans, because the fans vary so widely on what they want..
As a fan, I want a fun, exciting movie full of space adventure and pulp heroics. Listen to me, Disney! (I doubt I'll be disappointed)
Now Disney have lucasfilm does this mean we will see the live tv series soon. I remember hearing george lucas saying at the present it would cost something like 50million dollars an episode. What do you think?
No, Disney will not give the fns what they want because the fans don't want the samething.
In sports there is saying (in regards to the GM's of teams) "If you listen to the fans, you'll end up watching the game with them".
A study and/or movie maker CAN'T listen to the fans, they can only do what they want to do, tell the story they want to tell and do what they feel is right/the best thing to do. No film will please everyone. Some fans want something completely original, some want the EU material to be adapted, some want the EU characters in original stories, some want Old Republic stories some want RotJ sequels. Some want to see Luke, Han and Leia, some don't etc.... You just can't listen to the fans and "give them what they want" because all fans want something different.
Why would Disney owning Lucasfilm suddenly mean that the costs of producing the live-action television series would go down or suddenly become affordable? Disney may have greater resources than Lucasfilm would have had as an independent corporation, but Lucasfilm isn't the only subsidiary of the Disney Corporation and, while their (Disney's) resources are vast, they're not infinite.
Of course GL didn't take the fans feelings. He has said many times that no one wanted a story about a boy, but he had to show innocence and said it was the movie he wanted to make. Thus, not for the fans. Not for money, he didn't care. He wanted the story that way otherwise it Anakin would have to be evil right out of the womb lol
If Jar Jar had a non screeching voice, the pod race wasn't so long, that'd help.
If you want a source of entertainment that listens to fans, go petition your favorite band. I'm sure Nickelback will sell out more to make you happy.
Oh God, a politically correct Star Wars movie... the horror! (Not sarcasm at all. I'll start using "African American" and "Hispanic American of Mexican descent" when I start seeing the box "European American of Irish descent" on applications and such.)
Guess i'm the rebel then, I like the NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Kinda goes back to Lukes "NO! that's Imposible that's not true!" quote.
Also Look aroung at threads on the in the PT area on the forums around here. You see proof that the PT was Just as widly accepted as the OT when they came out, for the most part. It's just the internet fantrolls, as i like to call them, who dislike it. They are like a virus, and they intoxicate the web day by day, spreading slowly and eating away at the fan base. With no known cure. (Though I be if some one would make a funny video that defends the prequels just as well as RLM insulted them lots of the hate would die down. I know it's possible)
It depends on what you are talking about rebooting. I don't think many want to reboot the movies, but many fans were disappointed by the story arc of the EU and probably wouldn't mind if the films strayed from the books...or didn't follow the books at all.
The false perception that the fans can have what they want. To better explain that, This post will say it better:
1. George Lucas Doesn't Get Star Wars
No, my friend. George Lucas created Star Wars. If anyone knows it, it's him. You don't have to like all his decisions, but never be so arrogant to assume that you know the world in a person's head more than that person.
This is different if you were to say, for example, that Peter Jackson doesn't get "Lord of the Rings". Whether or not I disagree (I do), it's still a valid argument because Peter Jackson is not JRR Tolkien and therefore is certainly capable of not getting it. However, if you were to say JRR Tolkien doesn't get "Lord of the Rings", we'd have the problem we're having here. If there's a discrepancy between what the creator thinks it should be and what you think it should be, then you are the one who doesn't get it. And that's fine. So you either learn to get it, or decide you don't care and kindly leave the fandom.
But, okay, so what is Star Wars actually? Well, I'm not going to presume to 100% know for sure because I am not George Lucas. However, using my own sense of deductive reasoning and film comprehension, and basing my thoughts on what Mr. Lucas has explicitly said numerous times as well as my multiple viewings of all six films, I think I can safely say that Star Wars is this:
Star Wars is, in a nutshell, an action fantasy story in Sci-Fi clothing. It is a deep treatise of mythological Campellian archetypes buried underneath the most ridiculous, ham-fisted, 30's serial melodrama. It's a look at how a person or even a government can become corrupt under the best of intentions and yet can still be redeemed, if even at the last moment. It's a saga for the young and the young at heart, a way to bring families together.
And as confident as I am in this analysis, if George Lucas were to call me up in five minutes and tell me I'm flat out wrong, I'd be flat out wrong. Because George Lucas created Star Wars, and only George Lucas can completely 100% "get it".
2. Star Wars Belongs To The People
No, no it doesn't. It belongs to the creators (and now to Disney, but you can bet Lucas protected his art). Yes, we bought the tickets and the merchandise and made it a pop-cultural phenomenon, but that's because we liked it. Your money only paid for a chance to see a film, or own a replica of a character or prop. That's it, done. George Lucas owes you nothing else, and you owe him nothing else but to let him go about his business and either give him (and Disney) money for things you like or stop giving him (and Disney) money for things you don't. Nobody is opening up your wallet and stealing your cash.
And for the People who don't like the Phantom Menace this is what you essentially think of everyone else:
It's a Cold Fact of Nature that The Prequels Suck, and You Have No Taste if You Like Them
This isn't a specific criticism as much as it is the end result of all the falsehoods I have heretofore mentioned. This is why I am militant in my fandom. For 13 years saga fans have had to put up with this (15 if you count the SEs). This is just plain wrong on so many levels.
First of all, art is subjective. You can not like something, but that doesn't make someone else bad for liking it. Best you can and should do is explain your view the best you can while being respectful, and hope the other person does the same, and then maybe learn something you hadn't before (whether you change your opinion or not).
Second of all, I-II-III are by no stretch of the imagination "bad" movies. Do they have flaws? Sure, what doesn't? But a lot of good, hard work went into making them. Watch any of the making-of specials on the DVDs. People worked hard, had fun, and that hard fun work shows.
Here's the real truth of the matter: Every single Star Wars movie, from "A New Hope" in 1977 to "Revenge of the Sith" in 2005 had the Exact. Same. Reception. Extremely mixed critical reviews and through-the-roof box-office numbers. Each film was amongst the highest grossers of its year. Even re-releases do well (in spite of limited advertising, the 3D version of "Phantom Menace" gained quite a bit of revenue and became the first SW film to top $1 billion in box office). And those critics that reviewed the films negatively? It's the same complaints from 1977-2005: acting, dialogue, plot, what have you. People tend to revere "Empire Strikes Back" as the best film in the saga (it's my second favorite after "Phantom"), and yet many reviewers, especially those that wanted to seem "cool" with the geek culture at the time, absolutely blasted the movie on the exact same points that I-III are now.
The only difference between then and now is that with the advent of the Internet, the haters have a larger megaphone. Looking squarely at ticket and merchandise numbers, I-III were just as successful as IV-VI, especially with the target audience: families with children. In fact, if you step away from the internet and the media and just walk up and ask people, you'll find more people will say they at least enjoyed I-III if not loved it. Real Die-Hards just need to debunk the cries of those who claim to be fans but really show they don't like Star Wars after all. We need to take back the discussion from the bullies who wanted something they should have known they were never going to get.
That's why I spent 2+ hours writing this. I love Star Wars more than most things. I just want to make sure that history remembers all these films as the classics they deserve to be, regardless of specific tastes (I didn't like Goodfellas, for example, but I recognize why it's a classic).
For more and better discussion of these points and others, visit A Certain Point of View, The Star Wars Heresies, and then, if you feel the love too, join the Star Wars Prequel Appreciation Society. If there are other arguments I somehow missed, tell me in the comments and I'll address them there.
May the Force Be With You, Always.
Having watched and read many of George's interviews I wouldn't agree that Star Wars is his entire vision. In that I mean that he has often made descisions about the story which are not artistic and that he is very much a student of creating a story. An example is changing the emphasis from Obi Wan to Qui Gon in the TPM. I have always thought that his strength was in creating the story. From me The PT does have a much more interesting story than the OT.
I don't agree that it is fan trolling that has damaged the reputation of the PT and I remember a backlash starting against TPM before it had been released . Although it wasn't one sided I also remember Empire and Total Film and others giving it good reviews at the time. I was too young to remember the reviews of Jedi in 83 and I see a lot of comments about how badly it was reviewed at the time but again some balance is needed and it received some excellent reviews at the time as well.
Having looked quite extensively at the box office and attendence there is no way that a claim that as many people attended PT as OT stands up. The OT is the only trilogy, ever that has 100 million ticket sales or more for each film and no other trilogy comes close. (ANH 200/ESB 100 / Jedi 100 opposed to TPM 96/ AOTC 57 / ROTS 74 that's 400 to 230 million).
I don't think that claims that the PT is poor is a fair judgement neither do I think that saying they are excellent stands up to the consensus. I don't think there is any serious argument that the OT is regarded as a better set if films by more people than the PT.
That Star Wars is owned by Disney and formally George is true. However, I would say that George has courted the fan like no other film maker. I have always looked forward to the changes that have been made to the films. Some of them I loved and one if them I hated because I didn't think the quality matched and it took me out of the film an example of that for me is Vaders changed line in Empire. Respect has to go both ways and fans have certainly not respected George. But has George respected the fans? Changing the films has been very exploitive and the hard line stance of not releasing past versions including the three versions of the SE is disrespectful. I hope one thing from this Disney deal us that the six films are now locked down and no more changes will be made. I think that George has bitten the hand that has fed him so well. But I also think that Star Wars fans have had what they deserve particularly since 99 and by that I'm not talking about the films themselves but the disappointment and anger they have created for themselves.
That fans are ripping the heart out of Star Wars and attacking particular films or parts of the EU amazes me and some of the vitriol on the boards makes me wonder if some if the people on here even like any part of Star Wars at all.
Lastly as far as Disney listening to the fans then I hope they don't. I hope that the people running the show don't second guess us because they'd end up in therapy for a long time and that they just make these films with total integrity.
I'm sure many people did work hard on the PT, but clearly, not on the plot or script.
And also, ANH and ESB's critical ratings are not similar to any of the PT.
I hope they don't listen to the fans. The fans shouldn't be influencing how companies make movies. If that were the case we'd be stuck with the Thrawn trilogy with the Big 3 recast just to appease the fans who loved it. Every company should want to please the fans but there is an extreme limit. Of course Disney knows they don't want to fix what aint broke by reinventing what SW is. And they should maintain the kinds of things that made it great, themes, tone, design etc... But the fans definitely should NOT be writing this thing. For the few good ideas I've read on here regarding Ep 7 I've read 50 bad ones. IF Dinsey obliterates the EU the so be it.
Thus far Disney is making all the right decisions -- Arndt, Kasdan, etc....
Trying to give fans "what they want" would be like trying to herd cats. They may try to listen to fans' complaints about the major stuff but ultimately they're probably going to make the movies they want to make. I think that's probably for the best. Too many cooks, etc.
Yeah, corporate product, tailor-made to fit the fit the consumer habits of a target demographic. True art!
A few things:
1) GL is a control freak, saying SW is not entirely his vision doesn't make a lot of sense.
2) ESB ABSOLUTELY opened to mixed reviews, history looks on it kindly, but that is after the fact. I was there. You can look up some of the old reviews on the internet actually.
3) Fan trolling DIDN'T damage the rep of the PT? Would beg to differ. GL was so bitter about geeks constantly trolling him, he said he wouldn't make another movie for the longest time (and he isn't, he handed it to someone else, partially to avoid the burden of the dweeb). That trolling was and still is quite prevelant.
4) If you are talking total tickets sold, that is ridiculous to compare them. OT has been in theaters a whole lot longer, and has been rereleased endlessly since. Yes, OT were more popular, but there wasn't much to compare them to then, unlike in the day of the PT, when there had been years of similar movies.
5) I know it is popular to say that changing the films is expoitive, but it really wasn't a harm to the world. No one said you had to like them or watch them, you could always watch the old version if you didn't like it; that whole crying fit about changing those movies is so laughable; I think there are worse injustices in the world, and I don't even think that was an injustice. It isn't like he had the Gestapo go door to door and take back every copy of the original, so that you could only see the modified version. Some liked the modified versions.
I would like to say that this is a very subjective viewpoint, one that hinges of a particular interpretation of the idea of copyright law. All art does in fact, belong to the people, eventually. Ideas and creative works eventually fall out of copyright and become a possession of the commons and anyone and everyone can do what they wish with them.
Now, this idea sees little influence these days, especially in the United States, because the modern corporate establishment, across a number of entertainment industries, has worked very, very had to make copyrights last ever longer and thus the idea of art in the public domain has fallen out of common understanding.
Originally in the US copyright lasted for fourteen years, which was judged a period of sufficent length to provide the artist with the necesary renumeration for their work, with the possibility of extension for another fourteen if the artist was still alive. That has changed, currently copyright lasts something absurd like the author's lifespan plus 70 years after death, which is utterly stifling. The single most important actor behind this change has been The Walt Disney company, which has had the US Congress retroactively extend copyright for the specific purpose of keeping control of Mickey Mouse.
Star Wars is 35 years old, though certain individual elements are much younger. At some point the idea of it being the exclusive property of one person or one corporation becomes rather ridiculous. I'm not certain where the line should be drawn, but the absolutist view regarding the artist treating everything they've ever done as their exclusive property forever is foolish.
For the purposes of what the guy you are quoting was referring to, it absolutely belongs to George Lucas.
What is forever foolish is those who protest what George chooses to do with HIS artwork (e.g. altering the OT) as if it is some kind of personal affront to them; some kind of cruel injustice where he is wronging them by releasing the movies in the way he chooses. Fanatical geeks are SO personally attached to these movies, they feel some sort of ownership entitlement, which is ABSOLUTELY LAUGHABLE. What is really wrong with that picture is the fact that these geeks have so little of a life that they hold on SO tightly to these movies; I think a lot of this insanely fervent anger toward Lucas about changing the OT (or making the PT in the way he did for that matter) is just displaced anger from individuals who are frustrated that they can't get a date. Hey man, get a girlfriend, get a life. Those are Georges movies, and he can do what he wants with them, he owes fanatics and geeks NOTHING.
Art eventually falling out of copyright is going to be WAY further than 35 years in this day and age; to make it like SW is public domain, or anywhere near it, would be silly, as would acting like George has betrayed anyone by what he has chosen to do with it.
This is satire, right?
Yes...and no...well maybe they will but I am leaning towards yes...or not.