double aught said:Really? I think it's one of the best shows on TV.Quote:
It's like how Breaking Bad ended great, but they keep watering down the legacy with endless Saul seasons
Render said:C@LAg said:
I am just tired of Star wars movies period.
They lost the thread and I still think it will be hard to fix with Ep IX.
if they are really doing the Old Republic, I would prefer that it was done as a TV series a la Game of Thrones. 13 episode seasons. $100/MM budget (cheaper than a movie.
Would be awesome.
Sure D&D do not want to dive into that again, but I can dream of such a thing.
I wish they'd stop making movies, too. The SW story concluded nicely with ROTJ. You don't need anything else.
It's like how Breaking Bad ended great, but they keep watering down the legacy with endless Saul seasons.
But since they're going to make movies regardless, I want them to go far into the future. I do not want Old Republic movies. That territory has already been explored. I want something remarkable and new, set in the distant future of SW.
As much as I hated his movie, Rian Johnson seems like the only one at Disney who would have the guts to do something completely new.
Gangnam Style said:
https://www.polygon.com/star-wars-celebration/2019/4/16/18410525/star-wars-galaxys-edge-lightsabers
This is going to be freaking awesome. The rumored $150 is very reasonable.
Hmmmmmm ... I have an envelope in my safe marked Disney, money set aside for future trips to Disney World. It just so happens that we're going in November. I may just come home with one of these.Gangnam Style said:
https://www.polygon.com/star-wars-celebration/2019/4/16/18410525/star-wars-galaxys-edge-lightsabers
This is going to be freaking awesome. The rumored $150 is very reasonable.
It depends on the context.TCTTS said:
As for Rogue One, what is your definition of "necessary"? What makes one movie "necessary" and another not?
SW may seem like it has a vast sea potential, but it doesn't.TCTT said:
We have NO CLUE what's coming next. Who's to say there aren't myriad movie-worthy stories left in this universe? In fact, it seems to me they've barely scratched the surface in terms of the potential and vast history to draw from. What if the Benioff & Weiss trilogy - in movie form - turns out to be better than even the OT trilogy? But because you're tired of this latest iteration of Skywalker movies, they should just stop altogether? That seems short sided to me.
It's nice to know that you've already seen a future where talented filmmakers with a clean slate - as opposed to sh*tty EU novelists, tied to very specific events - have taken a stab at this franchise and failed. Guess we should just pack it up!Quote:
SW may seem like it has a vast sea potential, but it doesn't.
Neither of the new trilogies coming next decade are tied to the OT. One is likely going to be set thousands of years prior and the other is going to be set in a completely different part of the galaxy, with completely new characters. They can literally do almost anything they want.Quote:
The EU tried to expand the universe, and 99% of it sucked. Partly because of poor writing and partly because it didn't "feel" like SW, but rather like "generic space adventure". And the stuff that did work was directly tied to the OT, in the use of OT aesthetics and characters, and/or in the use of its plot devices (good vs evil, super weapons, lightsaber duels, etc). It's just the same things rearranged.
And you know this... how? Because of all the other cinematic attempts that have attempted stories set in other eras or parts of the galaxy in the Star Wars franchise? Oh, wait... there haven't been any others.Quote:
The crux is that SW is reliant on a very specific era of its history to capture its unique feeling.
So because it hasn't worked means it can never work. Got it.Quote:
In that way, SW is like LOTR and GOT. It's an epic-type of story. And no one does sequels to epics, because it doesn't work.
Did Tolkien write a sequel to LOTR? Nope.
Does Martin have a sequel series planned for GOT? Nope.
And why not? Because it doesn't work.
Again, you can't possibly know this. To make such a statement with such definitiveness is laughable.Quote:
SW has already achieved its full potential.
You realize that's now how the industry works, right? Star Wars doesn't get replaced with some original blockbuster franchise. They'll just find another piece of IP to exploit - likely one lesser in quality and notoriety - or fill the gap with more superhero movies.Quote:
Let something else have a chance to shine.
Quote:
the other is going to be set in a completely different part of the galaxy, with completely new characters. They can literally do almost anything they want.
Render said:It depends on the context.TCTTS said:
As for Rogue One, what is your definition of "necessary"? What makes one movie "necessary" and another not?
The prequels exploring the backstory of SW is necessary, because they tie directly into overarching OT story.
In contrast, R1 is just an ancillary story of an already small story that we already know the end of (DS goes boom). Now, if R1 had a fun plot and fun characters it would diminish the effects of us knowing how it all ends, but it doesn't. So it's got nothing.
Ancillary stories have to be fun to make up for being ultimately unnecessary, and they can't be about characters we already know. Solo was more fun than R1, but we don't need the backstory of Han.
It's like how exploring the childhood backstory of Indiana Jones would be unnecessary, because that's not the point of the character. The point of the Indy character is escapism. You want to be Indy, because he sleeps with women and kills people. You don't care who he "is". Same with Han.
Meanwhile, it is necessary to explore Vito's backstory in The Godfather Part II, because its a different kind of movie. It's a different context.
So wrapping up, exploring the backstory a dead alien and how it ties to humanity's origins in a sequel to a small budget 70s horror movie is dumb and unnecessary. It's missing the big picture. The point of Alien was the strangeness and scariness of the Alien.
And exploring how Rebels got the plans is dumb and unnecessary, because the DS was just a MacGuffin. It's missing the big picture. R1 is about how Rebels got the MacGuffin to the MacGuffin.
You really think audiences want to go to a Star Wars movie where there is no shooting, no bad guys, and no lightsaber duels? If you don't do those things, it's not Star Wars.TCTTS said:
They can literally do almost anything they want.
"Full potential" isn't exactly what most people were thinking after the Batman & Robin nippled armor film.Brian Earl Spilner said:
I'm sure people said Batman had reached its full potential when Chris Nolan announced he was doing Batman Begins.
Chris Nolan had the impossible task of trying to surpass this.Brian Earl Spilner said:
I'm sure people said Batman had reached its full potential when Chris Nolan announced he was doing Batman Begins.
I'm pointing out absurdity when I posit "It's just lore in movie form. It's not a true story", and that R1 is about "How the Rebels got the MacGuffin to the MacGuffin".TCTTS said:
This is basically what all your arguments come down to; "the big picture." And I ask, why are only stories that tell "the big picture" the only stories worth being told in your eyes?
For instance, was Solo "necessary"? No. But it was a hell of a lot of fun, and a movie that most of TexAgs now seems to really enjoy. So what's the problem? I had more fun with Solo than I did with The Last Jedi, but according to you, The Last Jedi - because it's part of "the big picture" - is the only one of the two that should exist, which could not be further from the truth.
You have apparently missed the point I was making. SW is in the same place as GOT, LOTR, and Back To The Future. You can't do anything with it. Its story has been told. These are static, linear-type stories.TCTTS said:
Also, the Back to the Future parallel you keep trying to make is dumb and not at all analogous.
I could say the same thing to you. I did not try to put words in your mouth to try and trap you. I am not that kind of poster. If I misunderstood the point you were making, fine. My mistake. But don't accuse me of something I did not purposefully do.Quote:
What in the world are you talking about? Please show me where I even remotely alluded to those things not being in it. Until then, don't put words in my mouth in attempt to make an incredibly misguided point.
Batman is a utilitarian series like Star Trek. You can do different things with that series and it will work. But with things like LOTR, GOT, Back To The Future, and SW - you can't. They are linear stories.Brian Earl Spilner said:
I'm sure people said Batman had reached its full potential when Chris Nolan announced he was doing Batman Begins.
Quote:
In contrast, R1 is just an ancillary story of an already small story that we already know the end of (DS goes boom). Now, if R1 had a fun plot and fun characters it would diminish the effects of us knowing how it all ends, but it doesn't. So it's got nothing.
This is exactly my point. What you want has already been done in the EU - stories with those elements but WITHOUT Skywalkers, and with new characters and situations. But the "new" stories and situations weren't actually new. Because they can't be. Because if they were truly different, then it wouldn't feel like SW.TCTTS said:
Of course. No one is saying those things aren't going to be in it. But for all we know, a story WITH those elements, but WITHOUT Skywalkers - and new, compelling characters and situations in their place - could end up being a hell of ride, and maybe we even end up liking it more than what's come before.
TC asked me to expand on my opinion, so I did.Flashdiaz said:
So you're on a 800+ page thread about Star Wars to only argue that the story is a tired Hollywood product... where's that Big Bang Theory thread so I can go in there and tirelessly argue that the show sucks because I don't enjoy it and everyone needs to know why.
Yeah, that movie sure does have some great character arcs that compares to ESB.Urban Ag said:Quote:
In contrast, R1 is just an ancillary story of an already small story that we already know the end of (DS goes boom). Now, if R1 had a fun plot and fun characters it would diminish the effects of us knowing how it all ends, but it doesn't. So it's got nothing.
stopped reading after this.
Everyone gets an opinion but I think yours is definitely in the minority. R1 was/is cinematic greatness. It's not perfect, but it's not that far from being it. Just about every non-fanboy, SW fan I know places it in high esteem below ESB and somewhere on par with ANH or slightly below.
Render said:This is exactly my point. What you want has already been done in the EU - stories with those elements but WITHOUT Skywalkers, and with new characters and situations. But the "new" stories and situations weren't new. Because they can't be. Because if they were truly different, then it won't feel like SW.TCTTS said:
Of course. No one is saying those things aren't going to be in it. But for all we know, a story WITH those elements, but WITHOUT Skywalkers - and new, compelling characters and situations in their place - could end up being a hell of ride, and maybe we even end up liking it more than what's come before.
Therefore, it was (and is) the same stories over and over...
The Old Republic: Evil Empire led by Sith vs Underdog Old Republic led by Jedi.
The Mandalorian Wars: Evil Empire led by Boba Fetts vs Underdog Old Republic led by Jedi.
Darth Revan and Malak: Evil Empire (with superweapon) led by Sith vs Underdog Old Republic led by Jedi.
Prequels: Evil Force led by Sith vs Underdog Old Republic led by Jedi. Prequels are something creative and different, but do not feel like SW.
OT: Evil Empire led by Sith vs Underdog Rebellion led by Jedi.
Thrawn: Underdog Evil Empire vs New Republic led by Jedi. Part of the 1% that was truly original. But still beholden to OT aesthetics, characters, and tropes.
Dark Empire: Evil Empire led by Sith vs Underdog New Republic led by Jedi.
Yuuzhan Vong: Evil Empire vs Underdog New Republic led by Jedi. YV are something creative and different, but do not feel like SW.
Darth Krayt Empire: Evil Empire led by Sith vs Underdog New Republic led by Jedi.
Episode 7-9: Evil Empire led by Sith vs Underdog New Republic led by Jedi.
You can't have stories of exploration, or of non-combat, or diplomacy, or discovery. You have to have people fighting with lightsabers, you have to have people shooting at each other, and you have to have underdogs fighting an evil force. If you don't have those things, it's too smart for SW and it won't feel like SW. It is one of the major reasons why it is a limited series.
