Jump to content
LOTROCommunity

Cast of Star Wars Episode VII Announced


Recommended Posts

Strawman. At what point did I say they weren't famous? I said they weren't popular.

You did say younger audience, didn't realize you meant children. But even then I would wager that they would think Duane "The Rock" Johnson is popular. Yeah. yeah, he's a "rassler", but he can act. Watch the remake of Walking Tall or Snitch. So just because Disney owns the rights Star Wars will now be children's movies?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4ueFDnWT5Y

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 253
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Really? I think it looks good, more like an old school Star Wars film instead of that more recent tripe.

I find your lack of faith...disturbing.

Some random, running commentary about that fan-docu thing while I watch it... Oooh, intro parts were a little cringe-worthy to me. Poetry slams! LARPing! Things I would never do, ouch. Sorry, I loved

You did say younger audience, didn't realize you meant children. But even then I would wager that they would think Duane "The Rock" Johnson is popular. Yeah. yeah, he's a "rassler", but he can act. Watch the remake of Walking Tall or Snitch. So just because Disney owns the rights Star Wars will now be children's movies?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4ueFDnWT5Y

 

I actually own Walking Tall... but Snitch was terrible. His best role was in Be Cool, though.

 

But it's a process of logical deduction for whether these will be children's movies. Star Wars has recently been shown to do well in the form of that animated series 'Clone Wars'. I remember vividly that stuff had its own aisle in Toys R Us (who can resist fighting with the toy lightsabers, even when past your teens?) but the older stuff wasn't being sold. Kids didn't really care about Luke Skywalker (and he is a damn bland main character). They didn't care about Han Solo. All of that stuff is for older people. My generation doesn't really care about the old Star Wars films and the new ones were just an excuse for lightsaber fights.

 

Now we have a revival but set in a post-Empire world. And being in the hands of Disney, it had better be for kids or it won't be cared about. The older generation has their films, my generation isn't particularly bothered after the mess of the prequels, and the only ones left are the new generation. In Disney's hands, it will clearly be targeted towards kids. They aren't aiming for the old fans. Just like any 'reboot', the aim is to reference to old films but make new shiny things for kids. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You weren't born yet so you wouldn't know, but Luke and Hans were wildly popular with kids and well represented on the toy aisle when SW1 came out.

 

I liked Snitch, totally unrealistic premise, the DEA doesn't make deals with the parents of incarcerated children, but not a bad movie. IMO. Now it's not going to win any awards, but I enjoyed it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You weren't born yet so you wouldn't know, but Luke and Hans were wildly popular with kids and well represented on the toy aisle when SW1 came out.

They have this remarkable thing known as 'history' that allows me to see into the past! So I'm well aware of how popular they were. But that's exactly my point. Were. Kids don't care about them now. So Dinsey would try to aim this new set at kids. Which goes back to my previous point that they're brave to have a black main character aimed at kids (if my assumptions that these guys will play the main characters, of course).

 

I liked Snitch, totally unrealistic premise, the DEA doesn't make deals with the parents of incarcerated children, but not a bad movie. IMO. Now it's not going to win any awards, but I enjoyed it.

Snitch felt like it had potential but didn't do enough. I liked Walking Tall because I like the idea of a single person having brutal, more realistic fights. Like Oldboy and the new remake (best hammer fight scene ever). Snitch just didn't deliver for me.

And I forgot Doom! His best movie yet. Much more unrealistic than DEAs and parental deals but a hell of a lot more enjoyable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently he didn't watch any of the LotR films, either... :D

andy_serkis.jpg

schmerz-cb175336.jpg

080103-oscar2.jpg

When "I say haven't heard of" I mean haven't seen them in prominent long term careers, Andy Serkis as far as I'm concerned doesn't fit the role of someone I've heard of, he ran around providing the "framework" for an animated character, and not very well at that (in my opinion), as well as played Caeser in Rise of the Planet of the Apes (a truly awful film in my opinion), he's done almost nothing else that I view as prominent and makes him stand out, so I don't count him as someone I have "heard" of.

I'm not saying they won't be good for the parts, just that I haven't seen enough of them to form an opinion and therefore reserve judgement until it comes out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

snip

 

 

What is this history thing you speak of?

 

I just don't buy that the new SW movies will be aimed at children. Catering to old farts trying to relive their youth seems more logical. Why do you think every other movie made today a has super hero theme? I mean besides lack of anyone in Hollywood with fresh ideas. It's because they want the baby boomer dollar. If they suck a few kids in because it's all new to them then that's just gravy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is this history thing you speak of?

 

I just don't buy that the new SW movies will be aimed at children. Catering to old farts trying to relive their youth seems more logical. Why do you think every other movie made today a has super hero theme? I mean besides lack of anyone in Hollywood with fresh ideas. It's because they want the baby boomer dollar. If they suck a few kids in because it's all new to them then that's just gravy.

I consider these recent Marvel Cinematic films to be aimed at kids too. You get much more money by selling toys to kids than you do to those few creepy adults that still buy toys (but keep them in the box, obviously).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect that the new films will be targeted at a slightly older age group than the prequels. Although I actually like Revenge of the Sith and didnt mind Attack of the Clones.

Star Wars has always been targeted at a younger market, the original Star Wars films sold more merchandise than any other film has ever done. It was something that Lucas has done better then than most.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ladies and Gentlemen, I present to you the ubiquitous and box office essential PG-13 rating. The rating that most US movie distributors want these days.

 

It is not as black and white as some would have you believe but there is most certainly an economic imperative behind this rating.

 

A PG-13 movie is patently not a PG rated movie. It has material that pushes it out of lower categories. There will be adult themes, violence (although nothing is dwelt on or too explicit) and the language is stronger with even the inclusion of a few profanities. It is a rating that signifies that there is more adult material present without having to supply too much.

 

12 to 24 year olds make up over a third of NA theatre sales. They are an important demographic because they not only go to the movies a lot but they spend while at the theatre. It is this additional spending that is proving essential. The PG-13 rating appeals to this age group as it suggests they are getting a product that is not aimed solely at kids.It's sort of like adult content "lite". Parents like this rating as it means their children are not seeing an R rated movie. Companies that manufacture merchandise like it as many PG-13 rated movies can easily be linked to product ranges such as action figures etc.

 

Legend has it that when the first Conan movie came out in 1982, it's subsequent R rating (as opposed to PG co's there was no PG-13 rating then) rendered the range of action figures that were planned obsolete. They were subsequently repainted and marketed as He-Man. This may be apocryphal. 

 

The PG-13 rating is ideal for the current crop of action movies such as The Hobbit, Star Wars, Star Trek and stuff from the Marvel Cinematic Universe (yes that is a thing). It means that the movie producers can straddle two camps and please both the young and the old. It also means that the chances of ever getting another Punisher reboot are off the table because a PG-13 Frank Castle would be too lightweight. The recent RoboCop reboot was hamstrung by this rating as well.

 

The concept of the so called "Kids" movie is far more complicated nowadays. I also think considering anything that has a PG-13 rating as just a kids movie is also erroneous. And if this whole process seems like a colossal case of hedging ones bets and diluting art in the pursuit of money then you would be right. In the golden age of Hollywood, movies were made because they had a good story to tell. The rating was a secondary consideration. Now many films are made and steered by financial considerations and by the latest market research. It's film making by accountant and focus group.

 

This is why we got John Carter, The Lone Ranger and RIPD. It is also why they all failed.

 

Oh and the UK movie rating system a administered by the BBF is far superior to the half baked, contradictory policies of the MPAA. Most rough cuts of major Hollywood movies are shown first to the BBFC (which is incredible when you think about it) as their guidance over material and ratings is more measured, informed and held in higher regard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is this history thing you speak of?

 

I just don't buy that the new SW movies will be aimed at children. Catering to old farts trying to relive their youth seems more logical. Why do you think every other movie made today a has super hero theme? I mean besides lack of anyone in Hollywood with fresh ideas. It's because they want the baby boomer dollar. If they suck a few kids in because it's all new to them then that's just gravy.

This is about 'wide appeal' vs 'less wide or niche appeal'.

 

Film makers and Intellectual Property holders want to make product / transform IP  into wide appeal thing - that will be watched / used by all demographics and groups or at least by as wide spectrum of people as possible.

 

Since fans of IP, whenever it is Lotr or Star Wars or anything else will use the product anyway,  then that is why those products are less and less focused at them.  Becauase why cater to them at cost of other groups, if they will go see it anyway?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ladies and Gentlemen, I present to you the ubiquitous and box office essential PG-13 rating. The rating that most US movie distributors want these days.

 

It is not as black and white as some would have you believe but there is most certainly an economic imperative behind this rating.

...

 In the golden age of Hollywood, movies were made because they had a good story to tell. The rating was a secondary consideration. Now many films are made and steered by financial considerations and by the latest market research. It's film making by accountant and focus group.

 

This is why we got John Carter, The Lone Ranger and RIPD. It is also why they all failed.

...

 

 

I agree that PG-13 drives a lot of the decisions made for blockbuster-type films, but the three you cite here didn't fail because of that, in my opinion.

 

All three of them were just stupid-ass ideas for movies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But we're all missing the real question. Who plans on seeing it, purely out of loyalty/interest in the IP? :P

I plan on streaming it for free on a piracy site, if that counts? After that, if it's good, I'll buy it.

But, being the eternal realist, I'm expecting it to be shit so that I'm not disappointed if it is and I'm pleasantly surprised if it isn't!

Link to post
Share on other sites

But we're all missing the real question. Who plans on seeing it, purely out of loyalty/interest in the IP? :P

Purely? Hm... well that will be true only if the trailers that come out ahead of time look terrible.  It could look underwhelming and I'd still see it out of loyalty though.  I also like Abrams work on Star Trek though so I am anticipating a good movie experience.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But we're all missing the real question. Who plans on seeing it, purely out of loyalty/interest in the IP? :P

 

I love Star Wars 4, 5 and 6 (5 is a masterpiece), though phantom menace was awful it was only trumped in awfulness by phantom menace in 3d - the picture was too dark, the 3 effects so non-existent that towards the end I took off the 3d glasses and could not see any difference.

 

As for the new film, I'll wait until it comes out on dvd and watch it then.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But we're all missing the real question. Who plans on seeing it, purely out of loyalty/interest in the IP? :P

 

If I go see it, it won't be out of loyalty/interest in the IP, it'll more likely be because someone I know will want company.  It's not on my "must-see" list.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that PG-13 drives a lot of the decisions made for blockbuster-type films, but the three you cite here didn't fail because of that, in my opinion.

 

All three of them were just stupid-ass ideas for movies.

 

Indeed they were stupid-ass movies mainly because they were developed by committee. Creativity was trumped by "market research" and focus groups. If someone had said "what about a tap dancing Dog" I'm sure one would have been added.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I plan on streaming it for free on a piracy site, if that counts? After that, if it's good, I'll buy it.

But, being the eternal realist, I'm expecting it to be shit so that I'm not disappointed if it is and I'm pleasantly surprised if it isn't!

^^^^THIS except the part about buying it if I like it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 6 months later...

But the Force has always been around as part of living things blah blah blah SOMETHING ABOUT INFECTION blah blah aliens?

More retconning or what?

To me, given that I only ever saw the originals, I will always think of the SW concept of "Force" as something very similar to Far East "qi." You can't say "The Qi Awakens"...

Link to post
Share on other sites

But the Force has always been around as part of living things blah blah blah SOMETHING ABOUT INFECTION blah blah aliens?

More retconning or what?

To me, given that I only ever saw the originals, I will always think of the SW concept of "Force" as something very similar to Far East "qi." You can't say "The Qi Awakens"...

 

From what I've read, there's already a pretty big retcon in place: the only part of the existing Star Wars universe prior to Disney's acquisition of Lucasfilms that remains canon is the set of the six movies released in theaters (Episodes I-VI).  Timothy Zahn books, animated series, video games, other books, etc. - nothing in any of those is considered part of the official lore of the Star Wars universe now.

 

But yeah, not sure how the Force can awaken when it's already awake, but maybe it means that the new movie will introduce a multitude of new force sensitives/users.  At the end of episode VI, Luke and Leia are the only known Force users left, correct?  Thus, a resurgence in the number of force users could be seen as an awakening.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That title sounds a bit forced.

PUNISHMENT

....

Yeah, that title really doesn't interest me in the least. My first reaction was just "WTF really? Is the Force sentient now?"

But can they still change the title after this initial announcement? I'm reminded that Disney announced their next film is "Moana," and I just see that going to all sorts of awkward places...

 

From what I've read, there's already a pretty big retcon in place: the only part of the existing Star Wars universe prior to Disney's acquisition of Lucasfilms that remains canon is the set of the six movies released in theaters (Episodes I-VI). Timothy Zahn books, animated series, video games, other books, etc. - nothing in any of those is considered part of the official lore of the Star Wars universe now.

But yeah, not sure how the Force can awaken when it's already awake, but maybe it means that the new movie will introduce a multitude of new force sensitives/users. At the end of episode VI, Luke and Leia are the only known Force users left, correct? Thus, a resurgence in the number of force users could be seen as an awakening.

Oh cripes. Well. Still sticking obstinately to the originals. I see your possible interpretation in resurgence (you're right, it was only Luke and Leia), but that's implying Force-users ARE the Force, and that just doesn't work for me. :P

This just makes me facepalm!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...