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

david75

Ronan is just the sort of malleable cardboard actress Hollywood loves. Just enough ability to get by but to date she hasn't done anything in any way taxing or with meat on its bones. She may grow up to get some great roles and I do think she'll be here for the long haul, so I guess she can only get better. And i hope she does.
Not in Star Wars though.
It's a huge brand on its own, it doesn't need big or medium names to draw people in. They should cast unknowns entirely. They won't but they should. I'd rather it not be an ego vehicle for Tom cruise or brad Pitt sorta thing.

Plus, tag this stage in her career shed be mad to do Star Wars. She's going to be that character for the rest of her LCD and that can be a death sentence for a young actor/actress starting out.

bur

I could really do without the whole 'OMG, they should totally cast Benedict...look at me, i'm such a nerd' types surrounding this series.

Adamantium

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

I not worried about the casting so much as the director style and input, and how Abrams may set up a tone that other directors will forced to keep in all likelihood. This is esscense a reboot and a sequel to films that are the cornerstone of the whole series.

I used to be a major fan of this guy, but he is a very hollow vessel and reminds me of a giddy child, the fact that'd he let himself work with Orci and Kurtzman for Into Darkness and signed off on that, says all about his judgment. What the franchise had needed is an auteur ever since Empire Strikes Back and arguably Return of the Jedi. Hes just too goddamn frenetic, slow the **** down.

As for substance and his supposed love of characters that everyone lords over, i quote this:

roanoke wrote: »

His Star Trek made me want to watch some real Star Trek, his Super8 made me want to watch Close Enounters.

I imagine his Star Wars will likewise make me want to watch something else.

A part of me really wished Joesph Kosinki or David Fincher or somebody with a stable visual style and beautiful cinematography had been attached.


You just know Fincher wouldnt stick half the bull**** Disney would throw at him, he'd make it an evolution of the dark themes of the OT, it'd give Star Wars that sort of moral greyness/foreboding, that edge.

And it'd be a critical and commercial success anyway regardless of what focus groups would say. At worst we'd get a amazing off kilter/cult film that is as good as Empire Strikes Back.

Kosinki in particular has worked with Michael Ardnt, and Oblivion was a really good movie that I wasn't overly impressed first time, but is now one of my favourite sci-fi films ever, its up there with Blade Runner :eek: , and its mysteries are wonderfully handed substance with foreshadowing that has actual substance and intrigue to pay off, and realitically he is they guy they should have handed it to, him or Brad Bird.

Look Star Wars is not high art, but surely they could take a creative risk with a series that is going to a success on brand name alone. In recent years there's been numerous times it has worked well for both parties.

My dream set of movies:

Get back to the whole zen area/in the zone/trance like/runners high/ state force. Make it universal to human nature; we all have had serendiptious moments we cant explain when we do something once, but almost find it impossible to repeat. This the force.

Its not a religion and the Jedi is a civilan order (almost like a volunteer part time defence force), not a DOGMATIC religious one. It should not consume the charcters entire lives. Hopefully Luke has learned from the fall of the Republic.
No robes, just ordinary everyday civilian clothes, e.g. Firefly. They can be married, have kids, start a bar fight in Mos Eisley

Make your characters likeable/endearing even if they never had Jedi before their name.

Samurai style/ crouching tiger fights using kendo sticks for practice at Jedi Temple. Make it heavy
They should look they're trying to maim and kill each other. Have a non jedi character like Han Solo pick a lightsaber and make a balls of that, that sort of interesting/what if? organic storytelling was completely missing fromthe prequel trilogy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MbsHGABzw4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoOai3DQAQA

It should be very hard to fall to the dark side, and when it does it is terrifying to see heroes fall to it. It should be a grey area for nobody can really define what it is, not even Luke Skywalker. Its the actions of the person that are bad not the force itself. Non-force users can fall to it as well. It should be an almost trance like/psychotics state, e.g when Luke chopped off Vader's hand. They can fall to the lighter side too, like a pendulum constantly in motion, yet it takes persistent,conscious effort to fall either way. Hard to do, but would be amazing if they could pull it off.

following the last point
The Jedi in the PT were the miserable self indulgent, pompous bastards you could meet in the universe.These guys/gals do nothing but meditate all day,have a very wide of life, they should be the happiest people you could meet, they've an awesome job, hold a highly priveileged position and are mostly respected by wider society. Lighten up. They should be joyriding, having fun, making out, this does not mean they have fallen to the dark side

It should be a joyful profession and the films themselves should be just that approriate tone with undertones of darkness, they don't necessarily need to have big baddies for every film,. This would be a really refreshing change for blockbusters anyway.
in the sequel trilogy, its a new dawn for the galaxy, have some people be weary of them, possibly scared, make them relatable and human too.


The word "Sith" was not a thing in the OT. Vader was simply a very bad man indeed. Ironically the PT had Palpatine "the dark side leads to abilities some deem to be unatural". Thats interesting, more of that please

Its about the frontiers and new adventures, its about ordinary people and they should all feel important but replacable. Put the danger back in it.

Ordinary people should be just as interesting, don't have the whole universe talking about sith vs jedi for the whole series. The jedi were such a minor background element to the original movies, that was really about rebels, fighter pilots, ordinary people,smugglers and at most three ancient warriors trying to live and fight back while outwitting a Nazi dictatorship like government

Star Wars is not about superheroes, ground it, but make it a fantasy somehow connected to reality.






I just want an evolution of the themes in the Original Trilogy, we'll never get this though.

I mean the end of ESB is dark, everybody has had their ass handed to them, but it was still STAR WARS, and its still magical.

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

david75

So you want Lost Boys remade as Star Wars?

That could work.

Bored of vampires and baddies right now though. Dies there always have to be an enemy? There's lots of ways to rebuild a series of films even like SW without their being a bad guy/force to be dealt with.

Adamantium

All of clammoring/naive hope for it to be the exact same experience as the original movies is bull****. They'll never make these the same way. I wouldn't want to watch fan service small universe chewing sequels that are just ghosts of their predesscors, which is what they're going to make. They'll be eating their own tails forever


This is why fans have been disappointed for years, because they don't even know what and even if they got it, they'd say it wasn't the same film they saw when they were 10 years old.

I dont want to watch that same film I saw when I was 10. Who would? we grew!

Some would say there is no market for the films I described as Star Wars was always a children film series. There is truth to that. It never grew up with us, like everybody was expecting.

It doesn't mean it couldn't be much more!

I want a director with huge vision to go in and say "We can rebuild this, and we can make it better".
I want them to capture a "different" lightning in a bottle

PhiloCypher

david75 wrote: »

Ronan is just the sort of malleable cardboard actress Hollywood loves. Just enough ability to get by but to date she hasn't done anything in any way taxing or with meat on its bones. She may grow up to get some great roles and I do think she'll be here for the long haul, so I guess she can only get better. And i hope she does.
Not in Star Wars though.
It's a huge brand on its own, it doesn't need big or medium names to draw people in. They should cast unknowns entirely. They won't but they should. I'd rather it not be an ego vehicle for Tom cruise or brad Pitt sorta thing.

Plus, tag this stage in her career shed be mad to do Star Wars. She's going to be that character for the rest of her LCD and that can be a death sentence for a young actor/actress starting out.

So Atonement and Hannah weren't in anyway taxing or creditable performances, I'm curious what exactly constitutes a taxing role in your opinion? Are we talking one that requires losing half your body weight Bale style or something similar to what Charlize Theron did in Monster?

david75

No. If I had all week, 24 access to trainers and nutritionists, I can lose or build up any amount if body weight.

I meant she just basically is a pretty poor at best, amateur actress who hasn't done anything that's convinced me at least that's she deserves her current position. Like I said, she'll get better with luck. But Star Wars won't be it that does it. She's not got it.

PhiloCypher

david75 wrote: »

No. If I had all week, 24 access to trainers and nutritionists, I can lose or build up any amount if body weight.

I meant she just basically is a pretty poor at best, amateur actress who hasn't done anything that's convinced me at least that's she deserves her current position. Like I said, she'll get better with luck. But Star Wars won't be it that does it. She's not got it.

She was poor in Atonement?? A role she was nominated for an Oscar for lol, suffice to say I don't agree, she's earned her 'current position' (whatever that means) through talent which is not something that improves with luck it's something you either have or you don't. On topic, If I'm honest I don't want to see her in Star Wars either it would probably end up like Portman all over again, a talented young actress whose career was derailed for a time by the Star wars juggernaut.

david75

That was my point sue hasn't done enough to take on something like Star ars and be assured of a career after it.

It's typecast her for the rest of her probably short career if she did it.

It's really only something you can take on if you're a complete unknown or an established brand level actor.

And Oscars? Tosh. Its a scam. Winning roles/films are all bought and paid for by the studio with the biggest wallet. If you believe otherwise, I'm envious. It's a very organised system and a complete racket.

Certainly not an accurate meter of an actors ability. Only the respective marketing departments.

Sad Professor

Hasn't done enough? She's done loads! Ronan has more films under her belt than Portman had when she signed up for the prequels at about the same age. Natalie was only known for Leon and Beautiful Girls, both of which were supporting roles. Where as Ronan has had several leading roles in some pretty big films. In fact, she's been the lead in nearly all of her films.

So I don't think she has to to worry about being typecast. Portman's career wasn't hurt by the prequels. Nor was McGregor's. They both benefited enormously from the exposure.

Thrill

Abrams and Kasdan to take over as screenwriters for SW7 from Arndt. Sceenplay being rewritten.

J.J Abrams & Lawrence Kasdan Take Over As ‘Star Wars’ Scribes

The new Star Wars movie has a new screening writing team. It was announced online today that Episode VII director JJ Abrams and Empire Strikes Back co-writer Lawrence Kasdan will take over as scribes for the upcoming Disney project. The duo are taking over from Michael Arndt.

http://www.deadline.com/2013/10/j-j-abrams-lawrence-kasdan-take-over-as-star-wars-scribes/

Star Wars: Episode VII': J.J. Abrams and Lawrence Kasdan now rewriting screenplay -- BREAKING

Is this a disturbance in the Force?

Lucasfilm has just announced that Star Wars: Episode VII director J.J. Abrams and Raiders of the Lost Ark writer Lawrence Kasdan have taken over screenwriting duties from Michael Arndt, an Oscar winner for Little Miss Sunshine and nominee for Toy Story 3, who had previously been working on the script.

The movie is slated for release in 2015 but no firm date has been set. In its announcement about the screenwriter shuffle today, Lucasfilm said the current plan is still to begin shooting in Spring 2014.

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2013/10/24/star-wars-episode-vii-j-j-abrams-and-lawrence-kasdan-now-rewriting-screenplay-breaking/


.

Sad Professor

Hard luck for Arndt, but great news for the fans. You couldn't ask for a better writer than Kasdan. Bringing him in to work on one of the spin-off trilogies never made any sense.

It'll be interesting to see if he sticks around for the next two films. He doesn't like writing for other directors and obviously took this job for the money, but I assume he and Abrams have hit it off.

No way this will start shooting in the new year. Abrams has more than enough clout to dictate the schedule and force it back like he did with Trek.

FlashD

Sad Professor wrote: »

Hard luck for Arndt, but great news for the fans. You couldn't ask for a better writer than Kasdan. Bringing him in to work on one of the spin-off trilogies never made any sense.
.

What do mean 'hard luck'? He has been hired to put together the first draft and is still drafting 2 & 3. Did you really think they were going to leave one guy to screenwrite 3 new episodes of the biggest movie franchise worth billions?

I am happy to see them continue the scripting process with a quality team.

krudler

great news about Kasdan writing, things are looking up

david75

Its a cheap bad gimmick to begin with.

Lens flare.

Seriously.

We're supposed to admire someone's work and trust them because of lens flare??
Again, seriously??

Goldstein

david75 wrote: »

Its a cheap bad gimmick to begin with.

Lens flare.

Seriously.

We're supposed to admire someone's work and trust them because of lens flare??
Again, seriously??

To be fair he apologised for the lens flare recently in good humour.

I'm interested to see what Abrams does with it. Something like Star Wars is a lot closer to his natural home. My only worry is he'll be ultra conservative given the scope of the universe he's been gifted. He's tended to use a franchise's established characters/props/stories as crutches instead of employing some radical thinking and taking it somewhere new. Either way it's going to be a hell of a lot better and more entertaining than the prequels so it's something to look forward to.

david75

Star Trek reboots needed the self indulgent self referential nods to the past in order to really work.

If even one turns up in Star Wars it'll make us all sick. Think about it.

Sleevoo

Hopefully he does a better job than those awful star trek movies.

Sad Professor

FlashD wrote: »

What do mean 'hard luck'? He has been hired to put together the first draft and is still drafting 2 & 3. Did you really think they were going to leave one guy to screenwrite 3 new episodes of the biggest movie franchise worth billions?

I am happy to see them continue the scripting process with a quality team.

I've heard nothing about Arndt staying on to script the next two, something which I think they would have been keen to point out in the press release if true.

Badass Digest are the latest to add to the rumours that Abrams threatened to walk over Arndt's script. They suggest Lucas's whole outline may have been abandoned.

http://badassdigest.com/2013/10/24/arndt-off-star-wars-vii-kasdan-and-abrams-are-the-new-writers/

pixelburp

I think in terms of what to expect from the new Star Wars, I would temper peoples' hopes that this will in any way break the mold or show independence of thought. I'm excited as anyone by the prospect of Kasdan writing a new Star Wars script - who wouldn't be? - but I don't believe creatively this new film will have anything to say whatsoever.

In fact, chances are, this will be a far 'safer' set of movies than Abrams Star Trek reboot. Star Trek was a dead duck when Abrams came along and its history of alternate universes made a complete reboot an attractive & realistic possibility, allowing the franchise to reinvent itself from the ground up. Ok, the final results left a lot to be desired on that front, with the sequel particularly guilty of slavishly linking & winking at the mythology's past films. Still though, the attempt was made all the same, so props there.

The new Star Wars films however are going to be direct sequels to the first two trilogies, and considering Star Wars is still a pretty bankable product (ignore the awfulness of the prequels and consider the overall worth of the brand), I would be surprised if Disney will allow anything other than a cookie-cutter, inoffensive set of movies. I don't think they'll be any worse than the prequels, but I'm keeping my hopes severely pruned back here, regardless of the talent involved.

Personally, what a new Star Wars movie should try and achieve is that sense of rough adventure of the unexplored frontier that ran through Episodes IV and V; that simple wonder and excitement was one of the many things lost in the CGI ridden prequels and it'd be great to get that back again. So if they achieve nothing else, that'd be a win in my book at least.

Frank Lee Midere

david75 wrote: »

Star Trek reboots needed the self indulgent self referential nods to the past in order to really work.

If even one turns up in Star Wars it'll make us all sick. Think about it.

It isn't a reboot. It's the same universe.

Frank Lee Midere

david75 wrote: »

No. If I had all week, 24 access to trainers and nutritionists, I can lose or build up any amount if body weight.

I meant she just basically is a pretty poor at best, amateur actress who hasn't done anything that's convinced me at least that's she deserves her current position. Like I said, she'll get better with luck. But Star Wars won't be it that does it. She's not got it.

Well there's your opinion, one lad on the Internet, and general expert opinion that she is good.

Mickeroo

The thing with the likes of Star Wars, for me anyway, is that a film maker doesn't need to push the envelope to make a good Star Wars film. It just needs to be an entertaining story well told. I'm not saying I don't want them to be ambitious with it but I don't think it's particularly realistic to expect them to be, nor in any ways characteristic of the franchise to date.

Frank Lee Midere

The problem with a Star Wars sequel for me , as a moderate fan of Science Fiction blockbusters and TV shows is the über nerds who know their "canon" can ruin it for the rest of us. That's why Star Trek had to leave its original universe.

david75

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

It isn't a reboot. It's the same universe.

They told the story anew, and changed the whole timeline.

It's a reboot.

Mickeroo

david75 wrote: »

They told the story anew, and changed the whole timeline.

It's a reboot.

Where are you getting this information from?

Thrill

david75 wrote: »

They told the story anew, and changed the whole timeline.

It's a reboot.

I think when Frank Lee Midere said "it isnt a reboot. It's the same universe.", he was talking about Star Wars and not Star Trek.

david75

My understanding of relaunching a popular but past of best brand starting from the beginning, is a reboot.

If the new Star Trek films don't fall into reboot, what term is preferable? A retelling? A re-envisioned?

Semantics ahoy

Mickeroo

david75 wrote: »

My understanding of relaunching a popular but past of best brand starting from the beginning, is a reboot.

If the new Star Trek films don't fall into reboot, what term is preferable? A retelling? A re-envisioned?

Semantics ahoy

Thought you were talking about Star Wars, hence the confusion on my part (and everyone else's too I think).

Star Trek was probably unique in that it was a reboot that managed to be a sequel too. You could refer to it as either imo.

Gbear

Mickeroo wrote: »

Thought you were talking about Star Wars, hence the confusion on my part (and everyone else's too I think).

Star Trek was probably unique in that it was a reboot that managed to be a sequel too. You could refer to it as either imo.

A seboot or rebequel, you might say.