I don't think any of that will happen either. But much like Star Trek fans wanting and simultaneously not wanting Khan it never stops circling the internet.
Problem is, as I think we all know - franchises aren't really 'need' based. To step back from it all, did we need the prequels? Did we need eleven Star Trek films or did we need four spin off TV shows? They pass the point of creatively needing to exist at some point in their lifespans and then become self-sustaining entity's that need to exist for business reasons as much as the original creative ones. Until they burn out and then need re-energised at some point. We've seen that happen with Trek already.
Sure, this doesn't remotely mean what gets made is always worthless and can't simultaneously be good and satisfying. It's the blurry and hazy space between art and commerce. Itself a tired circular discussion. One almost never exists without the other. But are these new movies being made because they need to be made? Probably not. They're going to be made partly to generate new revenue for Disney out of the market for it.
And I'm completely aware that the same argument can be made for the last Trek film which in part Paramount needed to make to retain the rights. The plus side is that broadly ended up a well done and enjoyable film because of who they brought in to do it. These new Star Wars films could be the same thing as well.
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'
courtesy of Saquist
Last edited by kevin : 10-31-2012 at 03:11 PM.