Star Wars Rogue One

[boone7247]

I agree that Disney has done good with Marvel and so far with Star Wars. The thing that surprises me about Star Wars though is I am not sure if it is beneficial for them to go backwards in time to do movies about Han Solo and stuff. I expected them to do a lot of spin offs and universal plot webs starting with episode 7. With Marvel, you have different story lines across many characters that are all leading up to something with the infinity stones. So far with Star Wars, we haven't gotten that web yet and it looks like anything like what Marvel has is at least another 5 years away.

While I will probably watch all of these movies, the Marvel universe is more exciting because of how big that story web is across all movies.

I get why Disney is doing it, because they know people love episode 4-6 and hold it sacred, and therefore, they can make money off of it.

I believe Disney has done a good job with both properties. But while we all enjoy what they have done with Marvel and so far with Star Wars from Lucas Films. Lets not lose sight of Disney's goal here which is to make back that $4 billion they paid George for the rights to his properties, and then to make a profit after that. $4 billion is a lot of money, that is why they will use the past because people are invested in Han Solo, and other characters that we already know. Episode 7 and forward will introduce new characters that will hopefully give rise to the web you mention. Also when they started with Iron Man, there was no web, just Iron Man. Once that took off and they got creative people together they will able to put together a string of events and weave the characters into the movies.

 

[SCNCY]

I believe Disney has done a good job with both properties. But while we all enjoy what they have done with Marvel and so far with Star Wars from Lucas Films. Lets not lose sight of Disney's goal here which is to make back that $4 billion they paid George for the rights to his properties, and then to make a profit after that. $4 billion is a lot of money, that is why they will use the past because people are invested in Han Solo, and other characters that we already know. Episode 7 and forward will introduce new characters that will hopefully give rise to the web you mention. Also when they started with Iron Man, there was no web, just Iron Man. Once that took off and they got creative people together they will able to put together a string of events and weave the characters into the movies.

I may be wrong, but I thought I read/heard from somewhere that Disney has already made back its $4 billion. This was done through not only the one movie, but the merchandising and other licenses that they make money on. I agree, Disney is trying to make money and going backwards in time is a low risk way to make more money.

But with Marvel, wasn't everything already outlined for the movies in the comics? While I like the Marvel movies, aren't they just really taking things from the comics and making them in to movies?

 

[Sigmapolis]

This movie looks awesome. Another reason why Disney buying Lucasfilms was the best thing to happen to the Star Wars franchise. Just think if Disney's creative minds did the prequels, how incredible they could have been.

If Disney is so creative, then why did they basically remake A New Hope last year?

 

[bos]

If Disney is so creative, then why did they basically remake A New Hope last year?

We wont know if they did until this trilogy is finished. It has similarities but what the heck doesnt in that universe.

 

[boone7247]

I may be wrong, but I thought I read/heard from somewhere that Disney has already made back its $4 billion. This was done through not only the one movie, but the merchandising and other licenses that they make money on. I agree, Disney is trying to make money and going backwards in time is a low risk way to make more money.

But with Marvel, wasn't everything already outlined for the movies in the comics? While I like the Marvel movies, aren't they just really taking things from the comics and making them in to movies?

I was just looking into this. I would guess they have made back on the marvel side of things. Not sure on the Lucas side yet. Probably still a little to early for that. I have no doubt that Disney will ultimately make their investment back multiple times over. But they are a corporation and corporations have to make profits to keep investors happy. The easiest way to do that was to take the material already there and expand on it.

 

[CYCLNST8]

Well.....many Bothans did die.

Wrong Death Star. [insert nerd jimlad]

 

[CysRage]

If Disney is so creative, then why did they basically remake A New Hope last year?

Yes it did have a lot in common but JJ Abrams confirmed this was by design. They wanted to go off a blueprint they know was successful in order to bring back the old Star Wars fans. I'm sure this was largely in part because of the ****** prequels that left Star Wars fans bitter. Now, if the next movie is as similar as Empire Strikes Back, I am on the same boat as you but I fully expect it to be a whole new blueprint.

 

[Sigmapolis]

Yes it did have a lot in common but JJ Abrams confirmed this was by design. They wanted to go off a blueprint they know was successful in order to bring back the old Star Wars fans. I'm sure this was largely in part because of the ****** prequels that left Star Wars fans bitter. Now, if the next movie is as similar as Empire Strikes Back, I am on the same boat as you but I fully expect it to be a whole new blueprint.

I'm not too hopeful. People made the same excuse about the derivative nature of the first Star Trek reboot film only for them to... go right into a lame Wrath of Khan remake.

JJ Abrams is a hack who makes incoherent, derivative pap.

The propensity of modern, big ticket films to be direct remakes, remakes in everything but name, or just a repetition of "big bad guy wants revenge" (ripping off Wrath of Khan, among others) and/or "big bad doomsday weapon" (ripping off A New Hope, amid others) plot doesn't leave me much hope that these films are going to be anything but big, loud, but ultimately boring and soulless. I never thought I'd say this, but I'd almost PREFER the prequels... incompetently executed, sure, but at least they brought some new ideas and themes to the table.

 

[CloneIce]

If Disney is so creative, then why did they basically remake A New Hope last year?

You are right that it wasn't the most creative step in the trilogy, but it was definitely a success and laid the groundwork for the next trilogy. I think they were more focused on getting the series back on solid ground than anything, after the sub-par prequels. I do hope the rest of the new trilogy is a little more creative and charts more new territory (though I did enjoy the Force Awakens).

 

[cyhiphopp]

If Disney is so creative, then why did they basically remake A New Hope last year?

Have you ever heard of a literary parallel?

They made the stories similar to create a connection to the original trilogy.

I'm going to just guess that you're not a big Star Wars fan in the first place.

 

[cyhiphopp]

I'm not too hopeful. People made the same excuse about the derivative nature of the first Star Trek reboot film only for them to... go right into a lame Wrath of Khan remake.

JJ Abrams is a hack who makes incoherent, derivative pap.

The propensity of modern, big ticket films to be direct remakes, remakes in everything but name, or just a repetition of "big bad guy wants revenge" (ripping off Wrath of Khan, among others) and/or "big bad doomsday weapon" (ripping off A New Hope, amid others) plot doesn't leave me much hope that these films are going to be anything but big, loud, but ultimately boring and soulless. I never thought I'd say this, but I'd almost PREFER the prequels... incompetently executed, sure, but at least they brought some new ideas and themes to the table.

Do us all a favor and don't watch the next Star Wars movie then. You won't like it and the movie will be just as successful without you.

 

[Sigmapolis]

You are right that it wasn't the most creative step in the trilogy, but it was definitely a success and laid the groundwork for the next trilogy. I think they were more focused on getting the series back on solid ground than anything, after the sub-par prequels. I do hope the rest of the new trilogy is a little more creative and charts more new territory (though I did enjoy the Force Awakens).

A copy/paste "clip show" is not "solid ground" for the series.

An actually good film is solid ground.

I'm just rather sick of movies that just consist of scene after scene that says to the audience "Hey, remember this stuff, from older, better movies! Didn't you love that!"

I know it made like $50 trillion dollars or something, but that's not my metric.

I just don't see any hope they're going to be more creative and adventurous given the studios' production processes and philosophy when it comes to their big ticket, cinematic universe franchises. While some of them are competently executed (and particularly the Marvel films), they're rather bland and repetitive after awhile. Oh look. Another finale of a big CGI city-destroying battle with the bad guy. Yay.

Considering the few talents who might want to go in new directions get run off... Edgar Wright quitting on Ant Man, Deadpool having to fight tooth-and-nail to be what it eventually was... not too hopeful.

I'm sure they'll be competent, just likely empty, just like The Force Awakens. Ironic, too, given the prequels were incompetent but actually rather thematically rich and fresh with ideas.

 

[Sigmapolis]

Have you ever heard of a literary parallel?

They made the stories similar to create a connection to the original trilogy.

I'm going to just guess that you're not a big Star Wars fan in the first place.

I'm fully aware of literary theory. I do have an English minor from our beloved ISU.

There's parallels and influences, and then there's literally every character, plot element, and basically every scene has a 1:1 parallel mostly with IV and somewhat with V and VI.

I'm also fully aware that Lucas borrowed from/ripped off extensively from...

The Hero with a Thousand Faces
The Lord of the Rings
Dune
The Hidden Fortress
Flash Gordon
The Dam Busters
Lawrence of Arabia
Triumph of the Will
The Ring Cycle

And if you throw the prequels in there, there were strong elements of...

The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
Foundation (the Asimov series)
Ben Hur (the podracers)
Metropolis
Casablanca

...and several others.

Thing is... Lucas borrow bits and pieces from these all, mixing them together, adding his own, new ideals, and eventually forging a new whole.

The only influence on The Force Awakens seems to have been the other Star Wars films. That's the definition of lacking in creativity, and hence my denouncement of it as a bad start, a bad foundation, and glorified clip show/self-referencing failure that I did not enjoy.

I mean, how hard would it have been for them to go and get some old Buck Rogers serial and lift the plot and take the galaxy a long time ago, far, far away someplace new? Someplace that we didn't even know we wanted until we saw its wonder?

Instead we got stuff the world has had since 1977 and we've had all our lives.

Not only that, but an inferior knockoff version.

A third (THIRD!!!) Death Star and another trench run isn't a parallel. It's super lazy.

 

[cyhiphopp]

I'm fully aware of literary theory. I do have an English minor from our beloved ISU.

There's parallels and influences, and then there's literally every character, plot element, and basically every scene has a 1:1 parallel mostly with IV and somewhat with V and VI.

I'm also fully aware that Lucas borrowed from/ripped off extensively from...

The Hero with a Thousand Faces
The Lord of the Rings
Dune
The Hidden Fortress
Flash Gordon
The Dam Busters
Lawrence of Arabia
Triumph of the Will
The Ring Cycle

And if you throw the prequels in there, there were strong elements of...

The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
Foundation (the Asimov series)
Ben Hur (the podracers)
Metropolis
Casablanca

...and several others.

Thing is... Lucas borrow bits and pieces from these all, mixing them together, adding his own, new ideals, and eventually forging a new whole.

The only influence on The Force Awakens seems to have been the other Star Wars films. That's the definition of lacking in creativity, and hence my denouncement of it as a bad start, a bad foundation, and glorified clip show/self-referencing failure that I did not enjoy.

I mean, how hard would it have been for them to go and get some old Buck Rogers serial and lift the plot and take the galaxy a long time ago, far, far away someplace new? Someplace that we didn't even know we wanted until we saw its wonder?

Instead we got stuff the world has had since 1977 and we've had all our lives.

Not only that, but an inferior knockoff version.

A third (THIRD!!!) Death Star and another trench run isn't a parallel. It's super lazy.

It's Episode 7, not Episode 1 of a new Star Wars story.

It's still the story of the Skywalker family and their relationship to The Force. They can't go on a completely different journey if that part of the story is still to be told.

I'd love for them to create NEW Star Wars content after the last part of this story is told, but that's not the point of episodes 7 through 9.

 

[NorthCyd]

Good lord, do we really have to have these stupid arguments about the Force Awakens in the Rogue One thread? Who cares. If you didn't like it great. Let it go.

 

[Sigmapolis]

It's Episode 7, not Episode 1 of a new Star Wars story.

It's still the story of the Skywalker family and their relationship to The Force. They can't go on a completely different journey if that part of the story is still to be told.

I'd love for them to create NEW Star Wars content after the last part of this story is told, but that's not the point of episodes 7 through 9.

Exactly the problem.

Episode 7. Not Episode 4 again.

I'm fine with them bringing back old characters, settings, and universe elements (light sabers, X-wings, etc.). That's not the problem.

The problem was the plot and the complete lack of much new to go anywhere with it.

 

[cyhiphopp]

Good lord, do we really have to have these stupid arguments about the Force Awakens in the Rogue One thread? Who cares. If you didn't like it great. Let it go.

Sorry man. I shouldn't have argued here. It just ticks me off when people pay to watch a movie just to complain about how much they don't like it.

It's Star Wars, not some award winning intellectual masterpiece.

I'm really looking forward to seeing Rogue One.

 

[CloneIce]

I'm sure they'll be competent, just likely empty, just like The Force Awakens. Ironic, too, given the prequels were incompetent but actually rather thematically rich and fresh with ideas.

The only thing the first two prequels were rich in were CGI. Terrible acting, dialogue, and plots. Thematically, they were a bunch of loose ends tied together to sell toys, in my opinion. A Force Awakens was far superior.

The 3rd one was OK.

 

[Sigmapolis]

Sorry man. I shouldn't have argued here. It just ticks me off when people pay to watch a movie just to complain about how much they don't like it.

It's Star Wars, not some award winning intellectual masterpiece.

I'm really looking forward to seeing Rogue One.

A New Hope and The Empire Strikes Back are works of art.

The Return of the Jedi is not too far behind, either.

Sound, score, effects, plot, setting, creativity, imagination, characters... yup. Definitely.

 

[CYCLNST8]

The progression from Death Stars to Starkiller Base isn't actually that far fetched, in my opinion. Their story parallels the development of real life doomsday weapons. From Enola Gay to long range ICBMs.