Exactly. I'm definitely not taking that literally, at least according to Star Wars rules.

I have nowhere else to ask this, so I'll just ask it here.

If a new story/film were to include a Jedi or two as part of the backstory, would you rather they be minor named characters that have some sort of basis in canon? Or new? They would have just a few minutes of screen time and then die.

Just as an example, you have Sora Bulq, a Weequay Jedi who shows up on Geonosis. He only has a name because of the casting sheet or the novelization or some other source material. He never has a line and just shows up in the background in Sith and a few episodes of TCW.

Better to use this existing character and highlight him a tiny bit as part of the backstory? Or to generate someone new?

I think someone new or fall into the current trap of having to expose so much of a characters past that he becomes boring, leave some mystery

Hamill said a preview tease is coming?

As in PC game X-Wing?

Original or Alliance?

SpreadsheetAg said:

---

As in PC game X-Wing?

Original or Alliance?

---

Tabletop.

Simplebay said:

---

Hamill said a preview tease is coming?

---

Where'd he say this? Last time he promised the first Episode VIII trailer, he took a pic of his set trailer.

Hamill loves to troll

I don't know how I feel about this. On one hand, I love the get-anything-we-can attitude Edwards has to shooting, but on the other hand, I really do think stuff like this - where they absolutely know it won't be in the movie - can be very misleading. It'd be one if it were a featurette with a few shots here and there that didn't make the final cut, and had more of a behind-the-scenes vibe, but it's another to say. "Here's a preview of our movie," knowing in advance that certain shots/scenes aren't even part of the narrative. That just seems really weird to me...

http://io9.gizmodo.com/why-the-rogue-one-trailers-most-iconic-shot-never-appea-1790910745

Looking back at the trailer now, I feel like those were more or less character introductions. Even if he didn't intend to use it in the final cut of the film and just liked the look of it, I can't think of a better introduction for Krennic than what we got in the trailer.

The Jyn bit in the tunnel not appearing didn't bother me at all. Some of the others like Saw being completely different (bald vs hair), and the TIE coming up to face Jyn are some of the ones I'm more curious about.

But the one that I'm especially curious about is Krennic talking about the power being immeasurable to Vader. That's the one that I wanted to see play out the most.

I definitely lean towards the "this is misleading" camp. Don't me wrong, I loved Rogue One, but those two shots not being in the movie actually bugged me.

I just assumed that they got cut after the reshoots because they didn't fit and I'd actually be okay with that explanation. This is something more along the lines of him goofing around, which I actually don't have a problem with if it helps his process,but then marketing serves it to us as teaser bull***** It just seems....disingenuous.

Speaking of the tie fighter bridge scene...during that battle, how does a tie pilot have time to notice a single person out on that antenna platform and decide to go shoot at her?

I liked the fact that the trailers didn't just showcase the highlights of the film. It was enough to get me interested and excited about it, but it didn't ruin the first time I viewed it for me.

TCTTS,

Quote:

---

I don't know how I feel about this. On one hand, I love the get-anything-we-can attitude Edwards has to shooting, but on the other hand, I really do think stuff like this - where they absolutely know it won't be in the movie - can be very misleading. It'd be one if it were a featurette with a few shots here and there that didn't make the final cut, and had more of a behind-the-scenes vibe, but it's another to say. "Here's a preview of our movie," knowing in advance that certain shots/scenes aren't even part of the narrative. That just seems really weird to me...

---

I agree. That is incredibly odd actually. I hadn't really heard of that as a deliberate thing before. Like jabberwalkie said, I had assumed they were "left on cutting room floor" shots. Jyn in the tunnel I assumed was just missing footage from the known entry into the transmission tower and library vault. Just a dropped scene.

Similar with Krennic (I think that is Tarkin talking to, aboard Death Star, not Vader, but it might be? Have to look again) . Assumed it was part of the footage left out showing perhaps the Empire's plans for the station.

But this is a little different.

I still think some of the sequences represent an actual re-shoot of how they chose to introduce Jyn to Mon Mothma, and follow-up scene explaining the threat. I guess they realized that ALL the audience knew what the Death Star was.

All quiet on the Ep VIII front. Bet the hype machine will start gearing up soon though.

http://dorksideoftheforce.com/2017/01/09/director-rian-johnson-talks-luke-skywalkers-path-star-wars-episode-viii/

USA Today Article with Rian Johnson

Quote:

---

5. Episode VIII already has a title.

The director knows it. In fact, he's had it locked in his mind ever since he started working on Episode VIII a couple of years ago. "It was in the very first draft I wrote," Johnson says. So how bad does he want to get that big secret off his chest? "I'll just blurt it out right now!" he jokes. "All in good time, my friend.

---

Blatant Disregard said:

---

USA Today Article with Rian Johnson

Quote:

---

5. Episode VIII already has a title.

The director knows it. In fact, he's had it locked in his mind ever since he started working on Episode VIII a couple of years ago. "It was in the very first draft I wrote," Johnson says. So how bad does he want to get that big secret off his chest? "I'll just blurt it out right now!" he jokes. "All in good time, my friend.

---

---

Is it, "The Force Goes About Its Day?"

If the rumor from last year is to be believed, the title is "The Knights of Ren", but who knows. May have been completely untrue.

I would be okay with this.

How interesting would it be if Kylo wasn't just the antagonist of the film, but the actual lead (especially if he stays the villain and does not find or go after redemption)?

I wanted the prequels to be from Palpatine's perspective.

"The knights of ren strike back"

Would think it's kinda cool if Kylo gets trained more by Snoke, and in his quest for more power actually kills him.

What about "Star Wars: Rendeption"

I will only accept "The Knight of Ren" as the title if they accompany it with a classical composition of:

AgMarauder04 said:

---

Would think it's kinda cool if Kylo gets trained more by Snoke, and in his quest for more power actually kills him.

---

Would be cool - we haven't seen a Sith kill and takeover for his master.

israeliag said:

---

AgMarauder04 said:

---

Would think it's kinda cool if Kylo gets trained more by Snoke, and in his quest for more power actually kills him.

---

Would be cool - we haven't seen a Sith kill and takeover for his master.

---

Snoke is no Sith (my opinion)

"The Knights of Ren: A Star Wars Story" sounds like a cool future one-off part of the universe though

Star Wars: Ren and Stimpy edition