Movies Star Wars will take a break after Episode IX

[number305]

3 hours ago, sblfilms said:

That is neither what I said, nor was it inferred. Planning ahead or not planning ahead simply have no bearing on whether a story is good or not. Great story telling happens both ways, and really awful storytelling happens both ways.

 

The thing here though is that it’s hard enough to get one story made into a movie in Hollywood that the notion of planning out in any detail the plot of a multi-movie series ahead of time was nearly non-existent for the vast majority of the history of Hollywood.

So your story now is that when they made ep 7 they weren't sure they would make enough money to make another one so they didn't plan for it?

 

Hollywood history does not matter at all here.  I'm not interested in the thought process for Smurfs 1.  We are talking about Star Wars.  They knew they were doing a trilogy and they screwed up by having multiple directors with different visions and no one doing a good job of keeping the story coherent.  That isn't a poke at either Rian or JJ.  I think the story would have been better if either of them had had full control of the trilogy rather than passing it back and forth.  That has been my point the whole time that you seem to disagree with.  Disney seems to think I'm right since that is exactly what they are doing now.

[Reputator]

It's definitely a plus that they're planning it out. I don't think the Disney crew, and Kennedy particularly, really possesses the instincts to improvise a timeless story movie-to-movie. If nothing else, that's what Lucas was shooting for, while at least half of what Disney has put out so far has been largely popcorn fluff (some good, some not so much). By maybe taking their time with their next major attempt, they might actually hit upon something meaningful (and perhaps without as many plot holes).

[Remarkableriots]

29 minutes ago, number305 said:

So your story now is that when they made ep 7 they weren't sure they would make enough money to make another one so they didn't plan for it?

 

Hollywood history does not matter at all here.  I'm not interested in the thought process for Smurfs 1.  We are talking about Star Wars.  They knew they were doing a trilogy and they screwed up by having multiple directors with different visions and no one doing a good job of keeping the story coherent.  That isn't a poke at either Rian or JJ.  I think the story would have been better if either of them had had full control of the trilogy rather than passing it back and forth.  That has been my point the whole time that you seem to disagree with.  Disney seems to think I'm right since that is exactly what they are doing now.

https://makingstarwars.net/2016/01/j-j-abrams-on-why-hes-not-doing-episode-viii-and-criticism-of-the-force-awakens/

Quote

“I can understand that someone might say, ‘Oh, it’s a complete rip-off!’ ” he says, adding, “What was important for me was introducing brand new characters using relationships that were embracing the history that we know to tell a story that is new — to go backwards to go forwards.”

“I realized when I was working on [The Force Awakens], the amount of energy that was required to tell the story, and do it justice, knowing when Episode VIII would start shooting, there was no way — if I wanted to still have my children talk to me in my old age — that doing that would make any sense,”

JJ turned it down but he was executive producer on The Last Jedi.

[Brick]

If you think Kathleen Kennedy, and others at Lucasfilm/Disney don't have a plan for Star Wars then you are very naïve. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, number305 said:

So your story now is that when they made ep 7 they weren't sure they would make enough money to make another one so they didn't plan for it?

 

Hollywood history does not matter at all here.  I'm not interested in the thought process for Smurfs 1.  We are talking about Star Wars.  They knew they were doing a trilogy and they screwed up by having multiple directors with different visions and no one doing a good job of keeping the story coherent.  That isn't a poke at either Rian or JJ.  I think the story would have been better if either of them had had full control of the trilogy rather than passing it back and forth.  That has been my point the whole time that you seem to disagree with.  Disney seems to think I'm right since that is exactly what they are doing now.

 

You are arguing with something I haven’t said or inferred, again. When Star Wars was originally conceived, produced, and distributed, Lucas had no actual plans for subsequent films. There are even things that are obviously retcons from Star Wars to Empire, but they work magically and are some of the most defining moments of not only the series but of pop culture generally. The way the OT was made is the way the vast majority of series were made prior to the last 15-20 years. It is only in modern times where the franchise is almost exclusively the realm of major budget Hollywood product that it is assumed sequels will be made.

 

Amusingly the Star Wars trilogy with the most planning (The PT) is the worst one on almost every creative level, and the one with the least (the OT) is the best. 

 

To be as clear as possible: planning ahead or writing as you go have no effects on the quality of the final output. You can make a great or terrible story with either writing mechanism.

[Kal-El814]

3 hours ago, Reputator said:

It's definitely a plus that they're planning it out.

Again, not necessarily. Shit obviously wasn’t thought out between episodes of the OT Star Wars trilogy and that shit was pretty great. The PT Star Wars trilogy involved MUCH more forethought than the OT and it was MUCH worse. The overall plot for LotR (the books) wasn’t thought out when The Hobbit was written, but all that shit was great. Stuff like The Hobbit MOVIES were ALL thought out beforehand and those movies were bad.

 

Any insistence that planning out something like a trilogy MUST help the planning is wrong. It COULD. It MIGHT. But there’s so much equivalent evidence on both sides of the scale that you cannot make the claim that one is heavier than the other.

 

EDIT - that’s what I get for not scrolling to the bottom first, sblfilms nailed it.

[Remarkableriots]

Quote

"He was into it. And I remember that I pitched him the story at the very beginning, and he had notes, but he wasn't like, 'Oh my God, what the hell are you doing?' [Laughs] No, he was into it because I think he was into the storytelling. He's a great storyteller himself and he saw the potential of each one of these beats. I think he saw it for what we were going for, which is not... we weren't going for, 'Let's subvert a Star Wars movie.' We were going for 'Let's make a great Star Wars movie that has things in it that will push the limits of what we can do.'...

"He was really gracious, in just stepping back and giving us a blank slate to work with. The starting point was The Force Awakens script, which is quite a big, expansive, wonderful starting point. In that way, we are drawing directly from his work. But from that point forward it was a blank canvas."

https://screenrant.com/jj-abrams-liked-star-wars-8-last-jedi-story/#leave-comment

[Reputator]

2 hours ago, Kal-El814 said:

Again, not necessarily. Shit obviously wasn’t thought out between episodes of the OT Star Wars trilogy and that shit was pretty great. The PT Star Wars trilogy involved MUCH more forethought than the OT and it was MUCH worse. The overall plot for LotR (the books) wasn’t thought out when The Hobbit was written, but all that shit was great. Stuff like The Hobbit MOVIES were ALL thought out beforehand and those movies were bad.

 

Any insistence that planning out something like a trilogy MUST help the planning is wrong. It COULD. It MIGHT. But there’s so much equivalent evidence on both sides of the scale that you cannot make the claim that one is heavier than the other.

 

EDIT - that’s what I get for not scrolling to the bottom first, sblfilms nailed it.

 

You ignored the rest of my post. The people at Disney handling Star Wars right now can't do what you optimistically describe.

[Kal-El814]

33 minutes ago, Reputator said:

You ignored the rest of my post. The people at Disney handling Star Wars right now can't do what you optimistically describe.

It doesn’t matter because planning does not necessarily have an impact on the quality of multi part stories. They knew the prequels were going to be a trilogy and they sucked. They didn’t know the OT was going to be a trilogy and it was rad.

[Reputator]

8 minutes ago, Kal-El814 said:

It doesn’t matter because planning does not necessarily have an impact on the quality of multi part stories. They knew the prequels were going to be a trilogy and they sucked. They didn’t know the OT was going to be a trilogy and it was rad.

 

How the hell does it not matter who's in charge of making the films? If they lack the talent to pull off an unplanned series, then yeah, it kind of DOES matter.

 

And the Prequels sucked for a complex set of reasons. The planned parts, and the story concept behind them was probably their best parts though.

[Kal-El814]

1 minute ago, Reputator said:

How the hell does it not matter who's in charge of making the films? If they lack the talent to pull off an unplanned series, then yeah, it kind of DOES matter.

 

And the Prequels sucked for a complex set of reasons. The planned parts, and the story concept behind them was probably their best parts though.

I didn’t say that who’s in charge doesn’t matter, it obviously does. I just said that having a grand plan for an entire series from jump isn’t nearly as important as people seem to think it is.

[Reputator]

1 minute ago, Kal-El814 said:

I didn’t say that who’s in charge doesn’t matter, it obviously does. I just said that having a grand plan for an entire series from jump isn’t nearly as important as people seem to think it is.

 

Well, let's take the MCU for example. Do you think it would have been nearly as successful if they hadn't intricately woven threads of the overall story into each film, teasing and building towards the next successive entry? No one would argue it would've been. And much of the failings of the DCU have been attributed to that.

 

And now with the Sequel Trilogy, would you NOT say one of its biggest weaknesses so far, especially with the reveal of the latest teaser and the apparently backpedaling of many ideas, has been the lack of an overall direction?

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Reputator said:

 

Well, let's take the MCU for example. Do you think it would have been nearly as successful if they hadn't intricately woven threads of the overall story into each film, teasing and building towards the next successive entry? No one would argue it would've been. And much of the failings of the DCU have been attributed to that.

 

The MCU is not produced the way you seem to think it is. Ant-man for example exists in the MCU almost solely because Edgar Wright wanted to make an Ant-man flick. KF and Marvel didn’t have Doctor Strange in mind when they made the first handful of MCU entries. The series evolved over time.

 

The MCU is a perfect example of a series written as they went along.

[Bacon]

I am fine with Star Wars no longer being the Skywalker Saga. I mean, I like the lore more than the story. But EP 7 was part of the Skywalker Saga and then EP 8 said no and I didn't like that. I'll never like EP 8. It felt out of place. If EP 8 was first I probably would have liked it, but EP 7 was first. Like, I actually want Star Wars movies to be like KOTOR and TOR. That shit is more Star Wars to me than the actual movies. The Prequel Trilogy would have been the best for me if it wasn't part of the Skywalker Saga. 

[Reputator]

3 hours ago, sblfilms said:

 

The MCU is not produced the way you seem to think it is. Ant-man for example exists in the MCU almost solely because Edgar Wright wanted to make an Ant-man flick. KF and Marvel didn’t have Doctor Strange in mind when they made the first handful of MCU entries. The series evolved over time.

 

The MCU is a perfect example of a series written as they went along.

 

What? They definitely had an overall story in mind even if every beat wasn't planned. I'm not sure how changes and additions along the way negates that.

[number305]

8 hours ago, sblfilms said:

 

The MCU is not produced the way you seem to think it is. Ant-man for example exists in the MCU almost solely because Edgar Wright wanted to make an Ant-man flick. KF and Marvel didn’t have Doctor Strange in mind when they made the first handful of MCU entries. The series evolved over time.

 

The MCU is a perfect example of a series written as they went along.

Just want to say I respect you and your opinions.  

 

I think the Marvel version of planning is what is ideal to pull off a successful multi-part universe.  What Marvel has is some end goals in mind, and a set of rules that they follow.  That obviously does not mean that things don't change over time, new ideas are introduced, things are retconed etc.  That is going to happen over time.  But there is a consistent vision.  

 

My problem with this current Star Wars trilogy which maybe I have not articulated clearly enough is that they gave it to two directors who have very different visions for what the core story should be.  That is what I see as not being planned out well enough.  I like both directors for what they do.  JJ is more fan service and fun, Rian is deeper and more challenging.  I think either take on Star Wars could produce great results, but I think a mixture of the two where each director is changing the flow the previous director put in place is a long ways from an ideal setup.

[Greatoneshere]

28 minutes ago, number305 said:

Just want to say I respect you and your opinions.  

 

I think the Marvel version of planning is what is ideal to pull off a successful multi-part universe.  What Marvel has is some end goals in mind, and a set of rules that they follow.  That obviously does not mean that things don't change over time, new ideas are introduced, things are retconed etc.  That is going to happen over time.  But there is a consistent vision.  

 

My problem with this current Star Wars trilogy which maybe I have not articulated clearly enough is that they gave it to two directors who have very different visions for what the core story should be.  That is what I see as not being planned out well enough.  I like both directors for what they do.  JJ is more fan service and fun, Rian is deeper and more challenging.  I think either take on Star Wars could produce great results, but I think a mixture of the two where each director is changing the flow the previous director put in place is a long ways from an ideal setup.

 

Technically, like Lucas with the OT, it's really Kennedy in the producer role whose job it is to make sure the story is all seamless (like Kevin Feige and Lucas did before her), not the individual directors. 

 

Also, I'm unsure what people's problems are? So far the story of the sequel trilogy is seamless. What about The Last Jedi technically contradicts The Force Awakens? Sure, Rian Johnson cut off or ended potential plotlines from The Force Awakens (that JJ may resurrect), but that's not a contradiction, it's a story direction. 

[TwinIon]

Something else that I don't think people might appreciate is just how much time can be a consideration, even for films like Star Wars. Remember how many writers TFA went through? It was completely re-written a few times, often by very talented people. I'm pretty sure that Michael Arndt wanted another 18 months to finish his script when JJ and Kasdan took over. Watch 'The Director and the Jedi' that came with TLJ and you see how much time pressure Rian Johnson was under as well, and he was writing before TFA finished filming.

 

You know what can happen when you try and write multiple sequel scripts from the beginning? The writing process for the new Avatar movies.

 

That's obviously not a statement about quality, and I very much can appreciate when someone has a master plan and the continual pay-offs reaped from that singular vision, but at the same time I don't think that it's the only way to make a good series. Obviously I can't speak to IX, but so far I've very much enjoyed TFA and TLJ, and I think the distinctive vision we got from those two directors made each film better.

[johnny]

2 hours ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

Technically, like Lucas with the OT, it's really Kennedy in the producer role whose job it is to make sure the story is all seamless (like Kevin Feige and Lucas did before her), not the individual directors. 

 

Also, I'm unsure what people's problems are? So far the story of the sequel trilogy is seamless. What about The Last Jedi technically contradicts The Force Awakens? Sure, Rian Johnson cut off or ended potential plotlines from The Force Awakens (that JJ may resurrect), but that's not a contradiction, it's a story direction. 

The direction hurt their feelings 

[Greatoneshere]

2 minutes ago, johnny said:

The direction hurt their feelings 

 

I think that's true, but that has nothing to do with things technically contradicting themselves or the story not being seamless between TFA and TLJ.

[johnny]

1 minute ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

I think that's true, but that has nothing to do with things technically contradicting themselves or the story not being seamless between TFA and TLJ.

[Guest]

The major difference from TFA to TLJ is Johnson dumping JJs mystery boxing.

 

But here is the thing with JJ’s mystery box: there is nothing in them. The thrill and intrigue is simply in what isn’t known. JJ didn’t have a bunch of answers to the questions TFA raises, he never does.

 

Other than that the narratives have a pretty natural flow from one to the next.

[Greatoneshere]

7 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

The major difference from TFA to TLJ is Johnson dumping JJs mystery boxing.

 

But here is the thing with JJ’s mystery box: there is nothing in them. The thrill and intrigue is simply in what isn’t known. JJ didn’t have a bunch of answers to the questions TFA raises, he never does.

 

Other than that the narratives have a pretty natural flow from one to the next.

 

I agree with this. 

[CitizenVectron]

If JJ had made the entire series himself we likely wouldn't have gotten important answers anyway.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, CitizenVectron said:

If JJ had made the entire series himself we likely wouldn't have gotten important answers anyway.

We would have just got more questions. Bro has no interest in landing the plane, which is the thing that is most concerning about ROS as the finale to the Skywalker Saga.

[Greatoneshere]

36 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

We would have just got more questions. Bro has no interest in landing the plane, which is the thing that is most concerning about ROS as the finale to the Skywalker Saga.

 

Hopefully he learned something from the only other time he made a sequel, the horrid Star Trek Into Darkness. But if you think about it, all his movies get away with fridge logic: makes sense in the moment for the movie's sake, but upon reflection after seeing the film you realize how stupid a lot of it was. I'm a J.J. Abrams fan but he has a ceiling to his ability and talent as a writer and director, I think that's clear at this point. 

 

The only reason all of his movies have even worked were because they were all ticking clock thrill rides - Mission: Impossible III, Star Trek '09, Star Trek Into Darkness, and The Force Awakens (I don't remember Super 8 very well) never stop for a moment to breath - they rocket by so fast (and are often beautifully shot and scored, which helps a lot, to be fair) and are filled with great character chemistry and witty banter and great acting and fun dialogue that you forget to think about: has anyone for a moment taken a fucking minute to breathe? So, I don't know. The slower pace of The Last Jedi was a breathe of fresh air, as much as I enjoyed the energy and fun of TFA. There was just more depth and feeling to TLJ and that's often missing in J.J.'s films beyond the emotion of the scene in the moment regardless of how one feels about TLJ. 

[Guest]

JJ makes you feel things. That absolutely takes immense talent. I think he was a great choice for episode 7 as a bridge between the old and new.

[Greatoneshere]

42 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

JJ makes you feel things. That absolutely takes immense talent. I think he was a great choice for episode 7 as a bridge between the old and new.

 

He definitely does - the opening to Star Trek '09 with Kirk's father is proof of that. But often it's only emotionally powerful in the moment due to the filmmaking, not because the moment is necessarily earned due to the storytelling and character arcs, etc (to me). 

[Alpha1Cowboy]

On 4/17/2019 at 4:50 PM, Greatoneshere said:

 

Hopefully he learned something from the only other time he made a sequel, the horrid Star Trek Into Darkness. But if you think about it, all his movies get away with fridge logic: makes sense in the moment for the movie's sake, but upon reflection after seeing the film you realize how stupid a lot of it was. I'm a J.J. Abrams fan but he has a ceiling to his ability and talent as a writer and director, I think that's clear at this point. 

 

The only reason all of his movies have even worked were because they were all ticking clock thrill rides - Mission: Impossible III, Star Trek '09, Star Trek Into Darkness, and The Force Awakens (I don't remember Super 8 very well) never stop for a moment to breath - they rocket by so fast (and are often beautifully shot and scored, which helps a lot, to be fair) and are filled with great character chemistry and witty banter and great acting and fun dialogue that you forget to think about: has anyone for a moment taken a fucking minute to breathe? So, I don't know. The slower pace of The Last Jedi was a breathe of fresh air, as much as I enjoyed the energy and fun of TFA. There was just more depth and feeling to TLJ and that's often missing in J.J.'s films beyond the emotion of the scene in the moment regardless of how one feels about TLJ. 

 

 

Fridge Logic perfectly summed up a lot of TLJ. to be honest....

 

[Greatoneshere]

2 minutes ago, Alpha1Cowboy said:

Fridge Logic perfectly summed up a lot of TLJ. to be honest....

 

TLJ certainly had some fridge logic (the timelines of the three different storylines running concurrently still baffles me and no time skip was DUMB) but compared to TFA, TLJ is Memento or Dunkirk.  

[Alpha1Cowboy]

On 4/22/2019 at 3:36 PM, Greatoneshere said:

 

TLJ certainly had some fridge logic (the timelines of the three different storylines running concurrently still baffles me and no time skip was DUMB) but compared to TFA, TLJ is Memento or Dunkirk.  

 

 

It goes way way down when they sacrifice one of their last top military minds needlessly at the end for no real reason other than..it would look cool. 

 

When one of the worst Star Trek films manages to get it right.(Nemesis when Picard is about sacrifice himself and Data os like...no, I got this)..you know the director has shit his pants.   

[Remarkableriots]

 

[Alpha1Cowboy]

[Greatoneshere]

30 minutes ago, Alpha1Cowboy said:

 

 

It goes way way down when they sacrifice one of their last top military minds needlessly at the end for no real reason other than..it would look cool. 

 

When one of the worst Star Trek films manages to get it right.(Nemesis when Picard is about sacrifice himself and Data os like...no, I got this)..you know the director has shit his pants.   

 

Honestly I've never felt that to be a big deal. People make sacrifices they don't need to make in films all the time and people were fine with it in all of those other films so it's quite normal for it to happen in films so it happening in TLJ (while dumb, yes) doesn't seem like a big deal. 

[Alpha1Cowboy]

2 hours ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

Honestly I've never felt that to be a big deal. People make sacrifices they don't need to make in films all the time and people were fine with it in all of those other films so it's quite normal for it to happen in films so it happening in TLJ (while dumb, yes) doesn't seem like a big deal. 

 

 

Even the Avengers got it right.  

 

Spoiler

When Tony Stark sacrificed himself...it was because there was no other choice...no one else could do it in that moment and at that time.  While Admiral Holdo had plenty of suborrdinates included robots..including C3-PO that could have easily done it.  

 

I do understand that most lay people aren't knowledgable about the military and war....and that despite the title being Star Wars....the focus is 80% on the smaller narrative stories built within the arc of the war....that said...that's got to be near the first time in any war movie someone that high ranking (Vice Admiral) ever sacrificed themselves when there was no need to.  Seriously...I'm thinking of all films with wars I've seen and I'm coming up blank.  

 

I mean..even in real life when Stonewall Jackson was shot and killed while doing a needless task....it's been argued it changed the future battle of Gettysburg.  From a purely military standpoint...that move by Vice Admiral Holdo was pure fubar and made zero sense and just put in to give viewers a sense of emotional spectacle.....hell Lukes sacrifice was plenty and a better example done well and something no one else could do... Rian pulled that one off great.