Kanedas Bike Posted June 21, 2017 Posted June 21, 2017 1 hour ago, Mommar said: Other than flashier coats of paint the newer films really haven't been directed or written any better than the Lucas directed films. Still the same clumsy dialog mistakes odd performances from their actors and/or missed opportunities to make something more interesting (mostly I'm commenting on TFA because it's an Attack of the Clones Prequel mess that people refuse to acknowledge.) Dunno about that, I honestly thought The Force Awakens was a good movie. Yeah there were some cringe-y dialogue moments but other than John Boyega who was very guilty of over-acting all of the actors did well. I also thought it was heads and tails better than every single Prequel and better than a New Hope (derivative or not) and Return of the Jedi, I won't touch comparisons to Empire because that's sacrilege to SW fans. IMO Harrison Ford and Carrie Fisher were the only strong actors in the OT. 'Creative differences' usually spells disaster and I think we got lucky with Rogue One. Hopefully things work out for Solo because he's one of my favorite Star Wars characters too. ^And Ron Howard directing would be interesting...and yep, fingers crossed for sure. -b. Quote
Convectuoso Posted June 21, 2017 Posted June 21, 2017 Mmm...let's see where this goes from here. After Rogue One, I started building lots of expectations for this Solo movie, and I want to think that they changed directors for a good reason, just as the re-edited Rogue One for a better ending Quote
Chronocidal Posted June 21, 2017 Posted June 21, 2017 Eh.. if anything, for me I think TFA got back to what mostly made the OT good: the character interaction. The story, designs, and other things I wasn't too impressed by, but much like the rebooted Star Trek, the characters were good fun to watch, in spite of the problems. I don't even think the stories in the prequels were any worse, but most of the characters involved made them almost unwatchable. If they can get the actors to make passable impressions of the originals, and have fun with each other, I think the movie has a chance at being entertaining in its own right. Frankly though, I've given up on any semblance of working continuity in the SW universe, similar to Trek. Nothing really makes a lick of sense anymore, but as long as the movies stay individually entertaining, I'll keep watching them. My favorite stories have all been relegated to non-canon status anyway. Quote
azrael Posted June 22, 2017 Posted June 22, 2017 RON HOWARD TO ASSUME DIRECTORIAL DUTIES ON THE UNTITLED HAN SOLO FILM (Star Wars.com) It's a safe choice. Considering Lord and Miller's background, I'm not sure why they choose them in the first place. I think there's more weight to the stories about Miller & Lord butting heads with Kennedy from the get-go. Quote
sh9000 Posted June 22, 2017 Posted June 22, 2017 Looks like we'll never get that drugged out frat party buddy buddy Han and Chewie movie. Quote
Phobos Posted June 22, 2017 Posted June 22, 2017 Meh. I was never planning on seeing this train wreck anyway. There are too many interesting stories to be told in the Star Wars universe to waste time on an character origin movie. While Han and Chewie are interesting characters, I was fine with the arc they were given. The characters were not interesting enough to make me curious about their backstory, and we are given everything that we need to know about them within the first 5 minutes of being introduced to them in A New Hope. This just seems like a blatant cash grab in the guise of "giving the fans what they want". That being said, i'm sure this will make a billion, and I hope that Howard does a good job. He seems like an odd choice, but I guess thats why i'm not in the movie business. Quote
TangledThorns Posted June 22, 2017 Posted June 22, 2017 This will be Ron Howard's best sci-fi/fantasy film since Willow Quote
ErikElvis Posted June 22, 2017 Posted June 22, 2017 On 6/21/2017 at 0:25 AM, Graham said: I just want an Obi Wan movie staring Ewan McGregor. The same. Quote
Big s Posted June 22, 2017 Posted June 22, 2017 I'm not the biggest fan of origin stories. The usually dissapoint, but I'll probably watch it anyway. Even the worst star wars movies were worth at least one watch. Quote
Thom Posted June 23, 2017 Posted June 23, 2017 Was not really interested in Han's origin. I like him and Chewie, but I never gave what they did before much thought. Plus, it may be a little jarring seeing someone else being called Han Solo, and especially knowing where he's going anyway. Saying that though, I'll go see it as long as the trailers look good. Quote
Graham Posted June 23, 2017 Posted June 23, 2017 Oh, I'm sure I'll watch the Han Solo movie, but it's not a movie I ever wanted. Nor am I excited about it in any way. I'm not at all a fan of origin movies to be honest. For the most part they are completely unnecessary and often diminish a character. Now a live action Ahsoka movie, live action Rebels movie or an Obi Wan Movie staring Ewan McGregor, I'd be all over those. Quote
azrael Posted June 23, 2017 Posted June 23, 2017 Some more details on what may have went down... (EW.com) Spoiler'd for size Quote Spoiler ...Several sources close to the movie and others close to the directors tell EW that ever since filming began back in February, Lord and Miller, who are known primarily for wry, self-referential comedies like 21 Jump Street and the pilot episodes for Brooklyn Nine-Nine and Last Man on Earth, began steering the Han Solo movie more into the genre of laughs than space fantasy. Apparently, the split was a subtle one that became magnified over time: Lucasfilm and producer Kennedy believed Lord and Miller were hired to add a comedic touch; Lord and Miller believed they were hired to make a comedy. ... As usual with stories like this, not all sources agree. Another individual close to the movie says it wasn’t a question about how much comedy would be in the film. The consensus, however, is that the filmmakers were encouraging significant improvisation from the actors, which some at Lucasfilm believed was shifting the story off-course. ... ... One person close to the fired directors says: “They thought they were brought on to make a Phil and Chris movie. … Sometimes they just thought the actors could do it differently.”But others on the project say they pushed too far. It wasn’t just a question of tone. The variations added up to significantly change the story. They may have been brought aboard to give young Han Solo a wiseacre vibe and an irreverent style, but Lucasfilm still felt the directors had a responsibility to tell the story as written. When dailies began rolling in featuring improvisation from the actors and new ideas from the directors that significantly parted ways with the script, the relationship with the home office at Lucasfilm became fraught. As principal photography for the movie approached its end, it became clear that the filmmakers and producers did not share the same vision for some critical scenes. Reshoots were always possible (they are factored into almost every major film these days, and each new Star Wars project has undergone them), but as Lord and Miller dug in, refusing to compromise on what they saw as best for the film, the partnership went from strained to fractured. If they wouldn’t do the scenes as Lucasfilm and Kennedy wanted them now, why would they do them that way during reshoots? ... Lord and Miller are well-liked within the industry and have a style that has often led studios to compete for their attentions, but Kennedy — whose long history of credits include Back to the Future, E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial, and Jurassic Park — also has an immense, proven track record. Backing her was Kasdan, Star Wars royalty — the screenwriter of The Empire Strikes Back, Return of the Jedi and The Force Awakens. They became immovable objects. If the filmmakers were refusing to make the movie Lucasfilm expected, why continue? Which brings me back to my comment on this. They had the resumes for those 2 and yet they still hired them. Quote
technoblue Posted June 23, 2017 Posted June 23, 2017 8 hours ago, azrael said: Some more details on what may have went down... (EW.com) Spoiler'd for size Which brings me back to my comment on this. They had the resumes for those 2 and yet they still hired them. Hm. What this tells me is that it isn't easy to profile personality conflicts based on a person's resume. I mean, one could hazard a guess that it was their resumes that got the agents talking and got these two in the door to begin with. The personality stuff didn't become a visible caution until later on when Lord and Miller tried to add their own spice to the Han Solo Disney mix. Now, what I find interesting is the fact that these guys fought Kennedy and Kasdan to the point where they got in trouble for it, and that there was a complete miscommunication of what was required of them as directors. That's never a good sign. Quote
sh9000 Posted June 23, 2017 Posted June 23, 2017 Lord and Miller can probably fit right in a MCU movie. Quote
electric indigo Posted June 24, 2017 Posted June 24, 2017 At some point somebody must have thought it was a good idea to make the Lego Star Wars Games into a live action movie, which led to Lord & Miller... Quote
Dobber Posted June 24, 2017 Author Posted June 24, 2017 (edited) Then there is Phil Lord's tweet back in May...."what's so great about being reasonable?" I wonder if that had something to do with this crapfest. If so, that's pretty lousy of him, IMO. If people want something "new" or "edgy" in SW, do it with new characters not with established and beloved ones. Chris Edited June 24, 2017 by Dobber Quote
Dobber Posted September 18, 2017 Author Posted September 18, 2017 Just realized....with Ron Howard now directing Han Solo, if not for his untimely death, we might have actually had a Star Wars film scored by James Horner. Man that would've been a dream come true for me. Chris Quote
Mommar Posted September 18, 2017 Posted September 18, 2017 1 hour ago, Dobber said: Just realized....with Ron Howard now directing Han Solo, if not for his untimely death, we might have actually had a Star Wars film scored by James Horner. Man that would've been a dream come true for me. Chris That would have been amazing. Quote
derex3592 Posted October 17, 2017 Posted October 17, 2017 Should have named it "Scruffy looking Nerf Herder"...... Quote
TangledThorns Posted October 17, 2017 Posted October 17, 2017 I expect this to be his best George Lucas related film since Willow Quote
Dobber Posted October 17, 2017 Author Posted October 17, 2017 Scoundrel: A Star Wars story. Chris Quote
TangledThorns Posted October 18, 2017 Posted October 18, 2017 2 hours ago, Dobber said: Scoundrel: A Star Wars story. Chris Scoundrel? I like the sound of that Quote
Dynaman Posted October 18, 2017 Posted October 18, 2017 1 hour ago, TangledThorns said: Scoundrel? I like the sound of that Me too. I hope the trailers for this one are good, a prequal on Han Solo is not my idea of a good Star Wars story but I'll probably end up seeing it anyway. Quote
peter Posted October 18, 2017 Posted October 18, 2017 I wonder if they reused the Falcon set as theu did for TFA and the next film? I'm always curious what happens to these sets, like the Falcon, like the X Wings from Rogue One etc. I know the ones from the original trilogy were destroyed, but I always hope they preserve these new ones somehow. Quote
sketchley Posted October 18, 2017 Posted October 18, 2017 10 hours ago, peter said: I know the ones from the original trilogy were destroyed, but I always hope they preserve these new ones somehow. I think it really depends on the era the film was made in, and the production team behind it. For example, I remember seeing a making-of of Back To The Future 2 (1989), and they said that because the original (1985) was made in the era where they didn't save anything, they had to rebuild all of the sets and props. Of course, the bigger sets are generally broken up or sold as-is to another production (Dark City -> Matrix, Blade 2 -> Stargate Atlantis, etc.). With regards to the production team, Stanley Kubric destroyed (or had destroyed) all alternative cuts, shots, whatever of his (older?) movies. So... my money is on 'the mouse' saving those sets (or what parts of them they can), as they are plugging those films out at a rate of one per year. Speaking of that... does anyone know if they have a multi-year lease on one (or more) stages at Pinewood (or wherever)? If so, then that's pretty good proof that they are preserving sets. Quote
peter Posted October 18, 2017 Posted October 18, 2017 Good to know. Those guys building the 1/1 scale Falcon should just put a bid in for the film set when they're done, haha! Quote
Dynaman Posted October 18, 2017 Posted October 18, 2017 Storing props and sets is expensive so it is not generally done unless you plan on using it again. The Enterprise Bridge set was stored from movie to movie even though it changed quite a bit for each movie. One of the problems with Trek V is that the Bridge set was ruined and they didn't know till they took it out of storage. Quote
captain america Posted December 28, 2017 Posted December 28, 2017 So this image exploded all over Failbook yesterday... Spoiler Apparently Disney has denied that it's official but, well, time will tell. Looks like it might be concept art. Quote
Tking22 Posted December 28, 2017 Posted December 28, 2017 8 minutes ago, captain america said: So this image exploded all over Failbook yesterday... Reveal hidden contents Apparently Disney has denied that it's official but, well, time will tell. Looks like it might be concept art. I need to find the article again but Disney already confirmed they didn't make it, it's a really good fake that could possibly be using some real assets or something. Quote
TangledThorns Posted December 28, 2017 Posted December 28, 2017 I bet if this film makes $$$ instead of $$$$ that Disney will scale back green lighting new Star Wars films. Quote
Dynaman Posted December 28, 2017 Posted December 28, 2017 It is going to take more than one under performing film for Disney to scale back on SW movies at one a year. This is more than films, it is advertising for a new theme park (practically) in florida and California. Are they doing SW lands at their other parks? My guess is almost certainly but I don't keep track of the others. Quote
Kanedas Bike Posted December 28, 2017 Posted December 28, 2017 Star Wars as a brand is very strong, I agree that it'd take more than 1 or even 2 financially under-performing movies to cause Disney to scale back. They'd have to see a long term trend of declining returns from movies, merchandising, theme parks and other revenue streams. And given how TLJ has been received by some fans I suspect that Disney may be more conservative with story telling or with the latitude they allow writers and directors. Meaning new movies (not currently in production) would be more vanilla and by-the-book. And hopefully that poster was fan made. -b. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.