Movies ~*Colin Trevorrow's Star Wars: Episode IX - Duel of the Fates OT*~

[ALIEN-gunner]

9 minutes ago, SaysWho? said:

 

You know what bothers me about Jabba's palace?

 

Lando lifting down his mask. It's done as a reveal, but he doesn't need it to look at what's happening, so it's literally only down for the audience.

 

FFFUUU-

I remember that moment as a kid in a packed theater, literally everyone in the audience cheered. It was amazing!

[sexy_shapiro]

Return of the Jedi’s status as the weakest of the trilogy was solidified when I watched all three back to back. Like, I wouldn’t call Jedi a bad movie at all, but when you consider it as a direct follow up to Empire... boy, does it fall short. It does have its moments, like the space battle. It was also my favorite of the three growing up, which seems to be a commonly held opinion amongst children.

[AbsolutSurgen]

59 minutes ago, sexy_shapiro said:

Return of the Jedi’s status as the weakest of the trilogy was solidified when I watched all three back to back. Like, I wouldn’t call Jedi a bad movie at all, but when you consider it as a direct follow up to Empire... boy, does it fall short. It does have its moments, like the space battle. It was also my favorite of the three growing up, which seems to be a commonly held opinion amongst children.

Saying RotJ is weakest of the trilogy is like saying Hamburgers is the weakest of Hamburgers/Pizza/Chicken Wings.  It may be the worst of the group, but it's still freakin' good.

[johnny]

The Ewoks are awful. I think pretty much everything else is great in RoTJ.

[Pikachu]

It would have been so much better if they went with the original idea of going to Kashyyyk and liberating the Wookies.

[GeneticBlueprint]

8 hours ago, johnny said:

The Ewoks are awful. I think pretty much everything else is great in RoTJ.

 

My XBL handle is GenocideOfEwoks.

[Kal-El814]

For as bad as the Ewoks are I will never get over the notion that they’re only in the battle at all because Luke tricks them into thinking Threepio is a god. Even Sheev would go, “daaaaaaaaamn,” at that level of fuckery.

[Guest]

I don’t mind ewoks, tbh

[skillzdadirecta]

1 hour ago, Kal-El814 said:

For as bad as the Ewoks are I will never get over the notion that they’re only in the battle at all because Luke tricks them into thinking Threepio is a god. Even Sheev would go, “daaaaaaaaamn,” at that level of fuckery.

To be Fair, the Threepio thing only saved them from being eaten... they were already fighting the Empire on Endor and if I'm not mistaken, they thought Luke and Han were with the Empire. They saved Leah because Wicket saw she was fighting the Empire. That's right... I know his name. He was one of my favorite Star Wars characters when is was a kid 

Spoiler

I even wrote and drew a bunch of comic books of my own starring Wicket and a team of non Star Wars related superheroes

[CitizenVectron]

So the entire movie is basically leaked at this point. I won't provide any spoilers (unless someone PMs me and wants them). But what has also leaked (well, actually in an interview today lol) is Colin Trevorrow's version of IX.

 

Let me be the first to say, having read both the leaks and the Trevorrow plotline...that I wish Trevorrow had been kept on, and just given more time to do re-writes as he requested. I never thought I would say that.

 

I think looking back on this trilogy, regardless of what people think of the final products, we will all agree that Disney's greatest error was forcing a two-year release schedule for the movies instead of three, starting right at the beginning by forcing JJ (and Arndt before him) to release a year earlier than they requested. This trilogy would have benefited so much from allowing it time to breath and for nailing down the overall flow. Maybe even having a single writer/director team to tackle it (I don't care about that point too much).

 

But yeah, Trevorrow's version of IX would have fit perfectly with the themes of TFA and TLJ (conflict and push/pull/redemption between Rey and Ben). And no Palpatine (confirming that it was never the plan, JJ brought it in after he took over). Trevorrow's IX was basically the best parts of TLJ continued (Ben and Rey's emotional conflict with each other, no big bad). Just a big character story about two people somehow tied together and who need each other but also unable to convert each other. 

[Greatoneshere]

11 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said:

Let me be the first to say, having read both the leaks and the Trevorrow plotline...that I wish Trevorrow had been kept on, and just given more time to do re-writes as he requested. I never thought I would say that.

 

While everything you said in your post may be true, in no world would I prefer Trevorrow to Abrams, and I don't even think Abrams is that great. But Trevorrow . . . no thanks.  

[CitizenVectron]

Let me rephrase then: I wish JJ had filmed trevorrow's ideas, rather than bring in Chris "Martha" Terrio and himself to write. JJ is a great director, but not a good writer. 

[CayceG]

49 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said:

So the entire movie is basically leaked at this point. I won't provide any spoilers (unless someone PMs me and wants them). But what has also leaked (well, actually in an interview today lol) is Colin Trevorrow's version of IX.

 

PM sent. I need these sweet, sweet spoilurz

[Mercury33]

3 hours ago, CitizenVectron said:

So the entire movie is basically leaked at this point. I won't provide any spoilers (unless someone PMs me and wants them). But what has also leaked (well, actually in an interview today lol) is Colin Trevorrow's version of IX.

 

Let me be the first to say, having read both the leaks and the Trevorrow plotline...that I wish Trevorrow had been kept on, and just given more time to do re-writes as he requested. I never thought I would say that.

 

I think looking back on this trilogy, regardless of what people think of the final products, we will all agree that Disney's greatest error was forcing a two-year release schedule for the movies instead of three, starting right at the beginning by forcing JJ (and Arndt before him) to release a year earlier than they requested. This trilogy would have benefited so much from allowing it time to breath and for nailing down the overall flow. Maybe even having a single writer/director team to tackle it (I don't care about that point too much).

 

But yeah, Trevorrow's version of IX would have fit perfectly with the themes of TFA and TLJ (conflict and push/pull/redemption between Rey and Ben). And no Palpatine (confirming that it was never the plan, JJ brought it in after he took over). Trevorrow's IX was basically the best parts of TLJ continued (Ben and Rey's emotional conflict with each other, no big bad). Just a big character story about two people somehow tied together and who need each other but also unable to convert each other. 

Disney’s error? What error? So far they’ve released two MASSIVELY successful movies. Two movies that made an ungodly amount for money and were, and I know this board doesn’t want to hear this, for the most part universally praised. So what mistake did Disney make? That they didn’t make 3 low budget Art House versions of Star Wars with Daniel Day Lewis screaming at Wilem Dafoe for 3 hours?

[CayceG]

15 minutes ago, Mercury33 said:

Disney’s error? What error? So far they’ve released two MASSIVELY successful movies. Two movies that made an ungodly amount for money and were, and I know this board doesn’t want to hear this, for the most part universally praised. So what mistake did Disney make? That they didn’t make 3 low budget Art House versions of Star Wars with Daniel Day Lewis screaming at Wilem Dafoe for 3 hours?

 

 

Why'd ye spill yer beanz?

[Chris-]

42 minutes ago, Mercury33 said:

Disney’s error? What error? So far they’ve released two MASSIVELY successful movies. Two movies that made an ungodly amount for money and were, and I know this board doesn’t want to hear this, for the most part universally praised. So what mistake did Disney make? That they didn’t make 3 low budget Art House versions of Star Wars with Daniel Day Lewis screaming at Wilem Dafoe for 3 hours?

And why the hell should I care if Disney made an 'ungodly amount of money'? 

[sexy_shapiro]

56 minutes ago, Mercury33 said:

Disney’s error? What error? So far they’ve released two MASSIVELY successful movies. Two movies that made an ungodly amount for money and were, and I know this board doesn’t want to hear this, for the most part universally praised. So what mistake did Disney make? That they didn’t make 3 low budget Art House versions of Star Wars with Daniel Day Lewis screaming at Wilem Dafoe for 3 hours?

You know this is Donald Trump’s capitalistic way of viewing art, right? If it has good ratings, that’s all that matters!

[CitizenVectron]

57 minutes ago, Mercury33 said:

Disney’s error? What error? So far they’ve released two MASSIVELY successful movies. Two movies that made an ungodly amount for money and were, and I know this board doesn’t want to hear this, for the most part universally praised. So what mistake did Disney make? That they didn’t make 3 low budget Art House versions of Star Wars with Daniel Day Lewis screaming at Wilem Dafoe for 3 hours?

 

I'd also say that the Bayformers were a giant error, but you might say otherwise.

 

Yes Star Wars ST has made money. It would have made money regardless, but we could have had a better overall arc if more time was given, especially for TFA.

 

[sexy_shapiro]

5 hours ago, CitizenVectron said:

So the entire movie is basically leaked at this point. I won't provide any spoilers (unless someone PMs me and wants them). But what has also leaked (well, actually in an interview today lol) is Colin Trevorrow's version of IX.

 

Let me be the first to say, having read both the leaks and the Trevorrow plotline...that I wish Trevorrow had been kept on, and just given more time to do re-writes as he requested. I never thought I would say that.

 

I think looking back on this trilogy, regardless of what people think of the final products, we will all agree that Disney's greatest error was forcing a two-year release schedule for the movies instead of three, starting right at the beginning by forcing JJ (and Arndt before him) to release a year earlier than they requested. This trilogy would have benefited so much from allowing it time to breath and for nailing down the overall flow. Maybe even having a single writer/director team to tackle it (I don't care about that point too much).

 

But yeah, Trevorrow's version of IX would have fit perfectly with the themes of TFA and TLJ (conflict and push/pull/redemption between Rey and Ben). And no Palpatine (confirming that it was never the plan, JJ brought it in after he took over). Trevorrow's IX was basically the best parts of TLJ continued (Ben and Rey's emotional conflict with each other, no big bad). Just a big character story about two people somehow tied together and who need each other but also unable to convert each other. 

PM’d. I normally don’t like to spoil myself for something like this, but I’m not emotionally invested enough to hold off. I have a feeling it’s gonna be a train wreck, so I’m morbidly curious now.

[Guest]

48 minutes ago, Chris- said:

And why the hell should I care if Disney made an 'ungodly amount of money'? 

Literally the only person on this board that ought to care is me, which is why I find Solo so objectionable!

[skillzdadirecta]

49 minutes ago, sexy_shapiro said:

You know this is Donald Trump’s capitalistic way of viewing art, right? If it has good ratings, that’s all that matters!

 

Not saying I agree, but by what metric are we supposed to judge if a film is a success? The ST films were financially successful, critically successful and audiences seemed to love them too minus a vocal minority on the internet. But folks on this board would have you believe that the films are a failure. I mean no one here has even seen the third movie yet Disney has made a grave error?

 

Financial success does not equal artistic success, Bay's Transformer movies are textbook examples of that as are the Prequel Star Wars films, but the sequel films seem to succeed financially, and critics and audiences seem to like them too so...

[AbsolutSurgen]

I haven’t read any spoilers but.....

 

I betcha Rey kills Palpatine at the end of the movie after an epic battle. 

[skillzdadirecta]

Just now, AbsolutSurgen said:

I haven’t read any spoilers but.....

 

I betcha Rey kills Palpatine at the end of the movie after an epic battle. 

 I'll see that bet and raise you

 

Spoiler

A Skywalker kills Palpatine after an Epic Battle.... Palp has Rey and Kylo on the ropes and Luke RISES from the grave as a force ghost and defeats Palpatine once and for all

 

[Guest]

Disney themselves at least seem to agree with CV’s point about the time between films being too short. They likely will give the full three years between entries in a series moving forward.

[GeneticBlueprint]

2 hours ago, sblfilms said:

Disney themselves at least seem to agree with CV’s point about the time between films being too short. They likely will give the full three years between entries in a series moving forward.

 

Or something functionally equivalent like having the next set all directed/produced by the same creative team and shot at the same time.

[skillzdadirecta]

Just now, GeneticBlueprint said:

 

Or something functionally equivalent like having the next set all directed/produced by the same creative team and shot at the same time.

Or having a coherent through-line through the whole trilogy rather than this relay race approach they seem to have employed with this trilogy.

[GeneticBlueprint]

2 minutes ago, skillzdadirecta said:

Or having a coherent through-line through the whole trilogy rather than this relay race approach they seem to have employed with this trilogy.

 

That's what I said but in a tuxedo :P

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

Or just not bother with trilogies at all and instead focus on making great standalone films in this universe .

[GeneticBlueprint]

Just now, SFLUFAN said:

Or just not bother with trilogies at all and instead focus on making great standalone films in this universe .

 

Why not both? I mean I really loved the original idea of having a saga film and a standalone alternate every year.

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

7 minutes ago, GeneticBlueprint said:

 

Why not both? I mean I really loved the original idea of having a saga film and a standalone alternate every year.

There are far too many variables that have to work just right to pull off an effective linked trilogy of films based on original material.

[Guest]

I think you have to take the Brad Bird approach, only do a sequel if you have a story that demands it. It’s hard to make a complete film if your initial idea is that the rest of the story will be told later. Not impossible, but difficult.

 

We have Disney+ for serialized SW!

[sexy_shapiro]

10 hours ago, skillzdadirecta said:

 

Not saying I agree, but by what metric are we supposed to judge if a film is a success? The ST films were financially successful, critically successful and audiences seemed to love them too minus a vocal minority on the internet. But folks on this board would have you believe that the films are a failure. I mean no one here has even seen the third movie yet Disney has made a grave error?

 

Financial success does not equal artistic success, Bay's Transformer movies are textbook examples of that as are the Prequel Star Wars films, but the sequel films seem to succeed financially, and critics and audiences seem to like them too so...

My issue is that is that there is no way to quantify art. It’s not science or math where we can point to hard numbers as quantifiable proof.

 

But that’s part of what I enjoy about discussing art! A good discussion or debate can help one understand or look at a piece of art in a new light. I’ve learned a lot over the years about art and story telling just by participating in internet and college debates. And even if one could quantify art, it’s not like this board is consistent with that approach. Just look at how popular it is to be dismissive of Avatar’s financial, critical, and audience-pleasing success. 

 

Also, I’m surprised that you’re using critical response as a metric for artistic success because I thought you were fairly clear in previous threads that critics are useless and mean nothing to you. Or is this an opinion you only apply when critics disagree with you? 

 

Financial success means little to me because it’s become clear to me as I’ve gotten older that capitalism is bad for art. Companies can make a huge profit by appealing to humans’ lesser nature. Just look at some of these wildly popular reality shows on TV. It’s a cesspool. Our culture has really suffered in recent decades because so much popular media cares more about profits than producing enriching stories.

 

And lastly, I’ve noticed that you sometimes try to minimize opinions you disagree with by saying that only a minority of people feel that way and that mainstream audiences generally disagree. Just because someone has a minority opinion doesn’t mean they’re inherently less valid than those who align with the consensus. Because that’s what you seem to be implying when you make statements like that.

[SaysWho?]

19 hours ago, sblfilms said:

I don’t mind ewoks, tbh

 

 

[AbsolutSurgen]

Star Wars has to be the most "commercial" of movie series.  Lucas practically created movie merchandizing as we know it.  For him, IMHO, Star Wars was all about being popular with audiences -- and certainly not high art.

 

11 hours ago, sblfilms said:

I think you have to take the Brad Bird approach, only do a sequel if you have a story that demands it. It’s hard to make a complete film if your initial idea is that the rest of the story will be told later. Not impossible, but difficult.

 

We have Disney+ for serialized SW!

To make movies that cost as much as Star Wars to make, you really need an existing IP, or the ability to create a franchise.  Otherwise, you can't afford to make them.

[SaysWho?]

17 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

To make movies that cost as much as Star Wars to make, you really need an existing IP, or the ability to create a franchise.  Otherwise, you can't afford to make them.

 

This is definitely true most of the time (Lord of the Rings was based on an existing IP, as one example). But sometimes you can get a ton of money to create a brand new franchise:

 

 

In 2009 dollars, this was much more expensive than any ST Star Wars film.

 

Maybe you just have to create the highest-grossing movie (at the time) in Titanic to get that kind of dough.