Star Wars: The Force Awakens [** SPOILERS FROM POST 4472 ONWARD **]

Zubeneschamali

Kinski wrote: »

Compare that to the original Star Wars: the first act proceeds at an almost leisurely pace once the initial action scenes are out of the way.

Indeed, Star Wars is famous for it's leisurely pace, intricate character building and witty, intellectual dialogue. I hope Disney doesn't make some slap-bang special effects action-fest blockbuster instead.

Antar Bolaeisk

pixelburp wrote: »

Phew: Disney earn yet more brownie points by shelving the planned 3D release of the remaining 5 films:
http://www.avclub.com/articles/disney-announces-new-special-edition-of-the-future%2C91698/

I'm sure they based the decision primarily on the poor performance & reception towards Episode1-3D, but it's yet another smart move by them. At this rate I might cross the line into full-blown optimism. My head is spinning at the idea :pac:

You mean I went to see The Phantom Menace again for nothing! I want my money back :mad:

krudler

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Well since it would have been retrofit 3D I think it's safe to say it would look like a load of arse.

The very mildly diverting Star Tours ride in Disneyland is probably your best bet for a slightly more immersive trench run

That was fun, they've updated it since

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDB4tUMrPfg

the 3D stuff starts around 8.30 into it

don ramo

i think theyve decided to hold back the other 5 films, most likely release them in the lead up to episode VII or VIII, even though theyll have to share the profits with Paramount, there is still money to be made, and i dont think these people let rivalry get in the way of profit,

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2013/01/28/lucasfilm-postpones-3d-release-star-wars-prequels/

allanb49

Wonder will Disney rererelease the original cut or will they go with the ones that lucas "touched" up when they do decide to release the original trilogy

allanb49

allanb49 wrote: »

Wonder will Disney rererelease the original cut or will they go with the ones that lucas "touched" up when they do decide to release the original trilogy

I'd imagine that we will be seeing the original cuts and Lucas's tinkered with cuts released at some stage as Disney are going to get every cent they can out of the franchise.

Kinski

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Indeed, Star Wars is famous for it's leisurely pace, intricate character building and witty, intellectual dialogue. I hope Disney doesn't make some slap-bang special effects action-fest blockbuster instead.

That's a profoundly ignorant response. You're conflating one aspect of film form, pacing, with others, character, genre, and dialogue, none of which I said anything about.

It's generally accepted that typical Hollywood blockbusters today are faster paced than ones from thirty-plus years ago (and Hollywood films in general are much faster paced than ones from fifty, sixty years ago.) Many directors now serve apprenticeships lensing music videos and TV ads before graduating to the big screen, forms in which it's de rigueur to assume the audience suffers from some form of ADD, and fast-cuts and mobile camera angles are the order of the day. The likes of Michael Bay bring this breakneck-speed aesthetic with them when they move onto feature films.

And many viewers do now look back on Star Wars and find the opening third somewhat plodding. I've seen the opening ten-minutes of ...Into Darkness, and it's pretty accurately described as 'breathless,' as it drops the viewer straight into the action and cuts rapidly between scenes aboard the Enterprise, on the surface of an alien world, and inside a volcano. Which is all well and good, but it's not very Star Trek.

And that's what concerns me, that Disney will make a fast, fun action-adventure flick, but one which just doesn't feel like a Star Wars film.

Zubeneschamali

Kinski wrote: »

TI've seen the opening ten-minutes of ...Into Darkness, and it's pretty accurately described as 'breathless,' as it drops the viewer straight into the action and cuts rapidly between scenes aboard the Enterprise, on the surface of an alien world, and inside a volcano. Which is all well and good, but it's not very Star Trek.

Oh, please. Star Wars was the movie that started that trend, it's the original of the species.

johnny_ultimate

Abrams can do less bombastic pacing. Super 8 in fact is very purposefully closer to the style and momentum of the early Spielberg and Lucas blockbusters. I wouldn't exactly call Mission: Impossible 3 sedate or anything - it does open on one of the most breathless prologues you could imagine - but at the same time it is an action thriller whose compelling pacing is near unparalleled amongst relatively recent mainstream cinema. It takes time for character building and establishing relationships, justifying the eventual setpieces and action. What sets it apart is Abrams takes the time to help us buy that a character who originated as a pretty characterless action hero actually has something to lose. Even Brad Bird - who on the evidence of his stellar animated output is pretty much the master of mainstream commercial genre filmmaking - couldn't match Abram's work on the franchise.

And Episode IV does toe that fine line between leisurely and turgidly paced. As Lucas' efforts on the prequel trilogy indicate - for their innumerable flaws, are not exactly as ADD-riddled as other CGI spectacles, which is hardly a positive thing in those cases - he is not exactly a master of directorial pacing. I guess I could be optimistic and say THX and American Graffiti illustrate he once did have some level of cinematic prowess, but I also think he made the right decision standing back from V and VI and handing the reigns over to directors who knew what they were doing. I once did appreciate A New Hope's relatively considered opening half, but revisiting it in recent times I could not avoid thinking its many awful expository sequences were simply poorly realised. The original Star Wars films are irreversibly coloured by nostalgia - while they undoubtedly offer iconic characters, scenes and locations, they aren't exactly the epitome of cinematic art as we know it, especially when evidence has since proven their creator often has no idea what the hell he's doing.

allanb49

I'm just thinking Abrahams loves his lens flares, the jokes about that have been done.

But will he employ some of the screen wipes that are kind of part of the star wars universe.

It wasn't till it was pointed out that I noticed how often that transition is used.

johnny_ultimate

Lucas just nicked the screen wipes from Kurosawa in the first place

allanb49

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Lucas just nicked the was influenced by Kurosawas screen wipes in the first place

fyp.

This isn't apple and Samsung it's an influence issue. but yeah you're right.

Just wouldn't feel right without the screen wipe.

Star Wipe
Star Wipe
Star Wipe!!!!

homerun_homer

So will Episode VII open with a tense scene from the finale and then cut back to some time before to lead us to that point:rolleyes: That's another huge JJ Abrams overused cliché that bugged me from his TV shows that made it's way to MI3.

Bar that and the lens flare niggles, I can't wait to see what he does with the franchise.

Hematocyte

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Lucas just nicked the screen wipes from Kurosawa in the first place

To be fair Lucas nicked them from 30's serials (just like Kurosawa did).

Hematocyte

Disney confirms Kasdan and Kinberg lined up to work on 'stand-alone' and 'spinoff' Star Wars movies.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/star-wars-standalone-films-lawrence-418421

I read it that they'll have a trilogy approx 2015-2021 and stand-alone movies in between. :eek: Star Wars overload!

Roar

homerun_homer wrote: »

So will Episode VII open with a tense scene from the finale and then cut back to some time before to lead us to that point:rolleyes: That's another huge JJ Abrams overused cliché that bugged me from his TV shows that made it's way to MI3.

Bar that and the lens flare niggles, I can't wait to see what he does with the franchise.

Imagine if he put a pre-crawl sequence in. There'd be outrage.

homerun_homer

homerun_homer wrote: »

So will Episode VII open with a tense scene from the finale and then cut back to some time before to lead us to that point:rolleyes: That's another huge JJ Abrams overused cliché that bugged me from his TV shows that made it's way to MI3.

Bar that and the lens flare niggles, I can't wait to see what he does with the franchise.

Is that necessarily a bad thing? Fight Club opened the same way, as did Casino. When used right, it really works.

old hippy

Hematocyte wrote: »

Disney confirms Kasdan and Kinberg lined up to work on 'stand-alone' and 'spinoff' Star Wars movies.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/star-wars-standalone-films-lawrence-418421

I read it that they'll have a trilogy approx 2015-2021 and stand-alone movies in between. :eek: Star Wars overload!

Like the infamous "Holiday Special" (RTE showed it, back in the day)? Or the 2 Ewok movies? Or the animated "Droids" series back in the 80s? Or since then, the Clone Wars series? Meh, there's always been SW overload

roanoke

old hippy wrote: »

Like the infamous "Holiday Special" (RTE showed it, back in the day)? Or the 2 Ewok movies? Or the animated "Droids" series back in the 80s? Or since then, the Clone Wars series? Meh, there's always been SW overload

You forgot animated Ewoks too!

But if you think the 80s was overload I think Disney are going to surpass it this time round. I reckon their long term plan is to to copy the Marvel Universe production format and get out at least one (maybe two) SW movies per year. We'll be drowning in the stuff soon enough.

old hippy

roanoke wrote: »

You forgot animated Ewoks too!

But if you think the 80s was overload I think Disney are going to surpass it this time round. I reckon their long term plan is to to copy the Marvel Universe production format and get out at least one (maybe two) SW movies per year. We'll be drowning in the stuff soon enough.

Good. People will get so sick of the over exposure and eventually tune out, thus relegating the franchise to the dustbin of history.

If only that had happened with Star Trek ;)

Sad Professor

Yeah, I suggested one film per year would be Disney's aim a few months ago. This news pretty much confirms it. However, I can't see it happening just yet, not with Abrams at the helm of the sequel trilogy. He likes to go at his own pace. He successfully got Star Trek 2 pushed back a year and will probably do the same with Episode 7. Assuming he's invited back for 8 and 9, there's no way he'll do them with only a 2 year break in between. I suspect Disney know this which is why they are keen to get these standalone films moving. They'll need to keep the cash cow flowing.

stevenmu

I don't like the idea of having stand alone movies in between the trilogy films. That'll just confuse the hell out of people who go expecting to see the next in the series, and it'll annoy me having to wait.

They should really just do the stand alone movies first, get the trilogy ready and then release it with one film each year.

Handsome Bob

Suppose you can't blame them for wanting the maximum from their investment.

Sad Professor

The thing about these "standalone" films is they are unlikely to remain standalone. Disney is almost certainly hoping that some of them will spinoff into separate trilogies. While I'm sure they'll continue the Skywalker saga with an Episode 10, 11 and 12 if they have to, they'd probably prefer to transition the franchise to something a bit more flexible.

krudler

stevenmu wrote: »

I don't like the idea of having stand alone movies in between the trilogy films. That'll just confuse the hell out of people who go expecting to see the next in the series, and it'll annoy me having to wait.

They should really just do the stand alone movies first, get the trilogy ready and then release it with one film each year.

Why? Marvel are doing a brilliant job of it with the Avengers universe films. You'll have a dozen films in that franchise in the next few years. 3 Iron Man movies, 2 Thors. Another Hulk, Captain America sequel, and the sequels to The Avengers itself.

Roar

Sad Professor wrote: »

Yeah, I suggested one film per year would be Disney's aim a few months ago. This news pretty much confirms it. However, I can't see it happening just yet, not with Abrams at the helm of the sequel trilogy. He likes to go at his own pace. He successfully got Star Trek 2 pushed back a year and will probably do the same with Episode 7. Assuming he's invited back for 8 and 9, there's no way he'll do them with only a 2 year break in between. I suspect Disney know this which is why they are keen to get these standalone films moving. They'll need to keep the cash cow flowing.

Would imagine Disney only hired him after he assured them he'd meet the 2015 deadline though tbh. At least with Star Trek he had clout when it came to the sequel following the success of the first, so he was able to make it on his terms - here Disney have from day one pushed the 2015 date, so I would think it's coming out then no matter what. Don't think JJ could push VII back to 2016, even if he wanted to.

stevenmu

krudler wrote: »

Why? Marvel are doing a brilliant job of it with the Avengers universe films. You'll have a dozen films in that franchise in the next few years. 3 Iron Man movies, 2 Thors. Another Hulk, Captain America sequel, and the sequels to The Avengers itself.

Yeah it has worked out well for Marvel. But keep in mind that none of their films have been direct sequels, e.g. Iron Man 1 & 2 were both really just stand alone Iron Man films, you didn't really need to see 1 to then watch 2. And they are very differently named, so it has been quite easy for the general public to know what to expect.

If Disney do Star Wars 7, and then do Star Wars: Bounty Hunter or whatever, people will go along expecting to see Star Wars 8. Then when Star Wars 8 will actually come out and people will be expecting more Bounty Hunter, but will actually get the sequel to the previous film.

If they do the naming and marketing right people might get it, but I think it's more likely that the marketing for all the films will consist mostly of the words "Star Wars" plastered everywhere with a few clips of light sabres, space ships and explosions.

Sad Professor

Roar wrote: »

Would imagine Disney only hired him after he assured them he'd meet the 2015 deadline though tbh. At least with Star Trek he had clout when it came to the sequel following the success of the first, so he was able to make it on his terms - here Disney have from day one pushed the 2015 date, so I would think it's coming out then no matter what. Don't think JJ could push VII back to 2016, even if he wanted to.

According to the trades, Abrams isn't committed to the 2015 release date. Given the post production time on these films, I can easily see it being pushed back a year.

I'd say Abrams is in a pretty powerful position. It's not like he went begging for the job. He initially turned the film down publicly, but Kennedy wanted him so bad she wouldn't take no for answer. Disney obviously want a safe pair of hands.

krudler

stevenmu wrote: »

Yeah it has worked out well for Marvel. But keep in mind that none of their films have been direct sequels, e.g. Iron Man 1 & 2 were both really just stand alone Iron Man films, you didn't really need to see 1 to then watch 2. And they are very differently named, so it has been quite easy for the general public to know what to expect.

If Disney do Star Wars 7, and then do Star Wars: Bounty Hunter or whatever, people will go along expecting to see Star Wars 8. Then when Star Wars 8 will actually come out and people will be expecting more Bounty Hunter, but will actually get the sequel to the previous film.

If they do the naming and marketing right people might get it, but I think it's more likely that the marketing for all the films will consist mostly of the words "Star Wars" plastered everywhere with a few clips of light sabres, space ships and explosions.

Thats because a lot of the cinemagoing public are morons. people should read up on what they're going to watch.

Madbod

Bring it on, it'll be a nice change to seeing the same characters all the time in franchise movies (eg Trek) and gives them a chance to explore the Star Wars Universe. What hamstrung these films is they never strayed too far from Mr Lucas' vision and the prequels proved how flawed it could be


i want to see a sith lord movie and I want to see them absolutely retract that utter hogwash about metaclorians or whatever they call the force now

hogwash!