The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Off Topic Discussions > J.J. Abrams is rebooting Star Wars now..
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 04-28-2014, 03:25 AM
horatio's Avatar
horatio horatio is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,282
Default

I am an old-fashioned fan of auteur cinema, a director should have total creative freedom. The more interference from the studio, the more business considerations influence the creative process (I don't have to point out the examples in Trek history, be it in the sixties or the naughties, do I) the more crappy the movie will be (Of course everybody will now point out Episode I and claim that Lucas has sold his soul to the devil or rather little kids ... but as bad as Episode I is, its critics are often oblivious to the fact that it was structurally necessary to show the innocence of the Old Republic.).

In the case of Star Wars the auteur is Lucas so it is safe to say that with little input from him and the Disney "usurpers" taking over Star Wars will go down the drains. About Abrams, as Omega has pointed out the same thing that happened with Trek will happen with Wars: it will feel more like a generic Abrams movie than a Star Wars movie. Whether this is good or bad obviously depends on whether one likes Abrams movies or not. And whether one appreciates individuality, stuff being out there that is actually different from each other and not pasted over with the same old pseudo-mystery stuff. Independent of whether I like it or not (and I did like Cloverfield), I don't want a monster to appear in Star Trek and Star Wars just because the guy at the helm thinks it is cool.
Now I am all for directors changing the paradigm of a franchise. But I think the benefit of Meyer ignoring Roddenberry's rules was that he nonetheless stayed true to them (e.g. Starfleet is just militaristic on the surface, TUC is one of the most anti-militaristic Trek stories). In the case of Wars I think the unity of the creative vision matters far more than in Trek. You can easily change the nature of Klingons or Romulans in Trek but it would be a disaster if Yoda were a big guy or Jedi weren't pseudo-Buddhist fighting monks anymore.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 05-04-2014, 07:38 PM
chator's Avatar
chator chator is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,261
Default

In addition to what you mention, I'm already kind of turned off by the fact that episode VII takes place 35 years after ROTJ. I guess it had to be due to Abrams desire to have Hamill, Fisher, and Ford in it, and the need to explain their advanced age. My guess is they will do a Spock-like cameo, and most of the film will be about the younger actors and their characters, likely Leia and Han Solo's children grown-up and their lives and adventures.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 05-06-2014, 10:55 AM
martok2112's Avatar
martok2112 martok2112 is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: River Ridge, LA
Posts: 6,480
Default

Star Trek and Into Darkness both still felt like Trek movies to me, regardless of what petty *****es and gripes people have about Abrams and Co. And they did their job in reviving the franchise from hanging onto life support by a thread. (Advantages of being a non-fan of anything, anymore. Fans are the most oppressive of creatures, allowing very little for creative freedom, and insisting that everything stay lock-step, true to form to the original, or else, face the jackbooted mobs of fanatics.)

As for Star Wars VII, well, we'll see. But, we have more than just the new trilogy coming at us. There will be side movies featuring popular characters (apparently, a Boba Fett movie is in the works among such projects). Just as Disney was pretty much hands-off with Avengers and later Marvel movies, I think it'll be the same with Star Wars.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 05-06-2014, 01:24 PM
horatio's Avatar
horatio horatio is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9,282
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chator View Post
In addition to what you mention, I'm already kind of turned off by the fact that episode VII takes place 35 years after ROTJ. I guess it had to be due to Abrams desire to have Hamill, Fisher, and Ford in it, and the need to explain their advanced age. My guess is they will do a Spock-like cameo, and most of the film will be about the younger actors and their characters, likely Leia and Han Solo's children grown-up and their lives and adventures.
As Lucas designed the first trilogy from the very beginning but not the third one it is naturally difficult. On the other hand the first trilogy and all its side-products like Clone Wars and so on have told an implicit background story about the eternal struggle between Sith and Jedi (or more general the dark side and the light side) so it is pretty natural to tell a story in which the Sith strike back during the time of the New Republic.
And while it is structurally unavoidable to have the children or grandchildren of Anakin Skywalker in it I agree that this does not sound particular interesting.
As I personally belong to the minority who likes the more political first trilogy more than the swash-buckling second trilogy and as I think that the third trilogy will be more in mood like the second one I will probably not like it ... but in the end it will all depend on the particular story.


Quote:
Originally Posted by martok2112 View Post
Star Trek and Into Darkness both still felt like Trek movies to me, regardless of what petty *****es and gripes people have about Abrams and Co. And they did their job in reviving the franchise from hanging onto life support by a thread. (Advantages of being a non-fan of anything, anymore. Fans are the most oppressive of creatures, allowing very little for creative freedom, and insisting that everything stay lock-step, true to form to the original, or else, face the jackbooted mobs of fanatics.)
Well, as the bard wrote long ago, "the first thing we do, let's kill all the fanboys".

Seriously, I totally agree with you, the notion that any kind of change is bad is strange. But so is the notion that all kind of change is good. The question in evaluating something new is not via asking how much it differs from what came before but whether it kept the good stuff and got rid of the bad stuff. We do e.g. all agree that the last two Trek movies vastly improved the space feeling of Trek, before it was literally flat and now it is properly three-dimensional (the E rolls around its horizontal axis, there is a shot that zooms into the bridge window from outside of the ship while we roll again around the horizontal axis, we literally are rushing through space together with Kirk, Sulu and the dumb redshirt and so on ).

My argument about Abrams, Trek and Wars is not that a new guy at the helm is automatically good or bad. My argument is that a new guy at the helm doing his generic personal stuff in a franchise is not a good idea. Of course the other extreme, a fan doing his fanboyish stuff in a franchise is also not a good idea. The last two Trek movies featured both extremes in the form of the director and one of the writers (and now that I think about it these were precisely my issues with the movies: Abrams - absence of soul, Orci - too much fanwank | and lest I get misunderstood as I pointed out above there is also numerous stuff I like about these movies: acting, effects, space-feeling).
If you think about TWOK you'll realize that its success was partly due to the absence of these extremes. Yeah, Bennett was new to Trek but he marathoned himself through TOS. Yes, Meyer didn't give a sh*t about Roddenberry's basic parameters but, you gotta love dialectics, nonetheless stayed true to them (is there are more more human Trek movie than TWOK or a more anti-militaristic Trek movie than TUC?).

Of course the most kick-a*s dialectical move is to whine about fanboys and fanwank while being a fanboy oneself (who, thinking about my personal experiences concerning the Romulan War, is only able to create fanwank when one tries to sketch out a potential story).
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-06-2014, 09:42 PM
chator's Avatar
chator chator is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,261
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by martok2112 View Post
As for Star Wars VII, well, we'll see. But, we have more than just the new trilogy coming at us. There will be side movies featuring popular characters (apparently, a Boba Fett movie is in the works among such projects). Just as Disney was pretty much hands-off with Avengers and later Marvel movies, I think it'll be the same with Star Wars.
Disney cancelled Clone Wars, but is green lighting a new CGI animated series called: Star Wars: Rebels, which takes place between Episode III and Episode IV. This decision was likely made to build a new fan base for Episode VII, w/c will have more in common with the original Star wars trilogy, than the Prequel trilogy. We should be seeing old favorites from Episode IV in Star Wars: Rebels, like Darth Vader, Princess Leia, C3PO, R2D2, Chewbacca, Han Solo, etc. Personally, I'm more excited about this series than Episode VII.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-21-2014, 03:40 PM
martok2112's Avatar
martok2112 martok2112 is offline
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: River Ridge, LA
Posts: 6,480
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chator View Post
Disney cancelled Clone Wars, but is green lighting a new CGI animated series called: Star Wars: Rebels, which takes place between Episode III and Episode IV. This decision was likely made to build a new fan base for Episode VII, w/c will have more in common with the original Star wars trilogy, than the Prequel trilogy. We should be seeing old favorites from Episode IV in Star Wars: Rebels, like Darth Vader, Princess Leia, C3PO, R2D2, Chewbacca, Han Solo, etc. Personally, I'm more excited about this series than Episode VII.
I am totally stoked for Star Wars: Rebels. Yes! The Rebellion era, albeit, a bit before the known heroes of Luke, Leia, Han, Chewie, et al. If the story telling is as good in this as it was for Clone Wars, then we're in for a good time.

I've been watching Season Six of Clone Wars, which is now Netflix exclusive. Every bit as good as the previous five seasons.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:00 AM.


Forum theme courtesy of Mark Lambert
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.