The author even makes this explicitly clear, this movie is "a retread." You can't call the prequels a retread, that'd make no sense. TFA is a literal remake of the original trilogy, particularly A New Hope.
"Star Trek fans had recoiled from the crass reshoot of The Wrath of Khan (1982) that was Into Darkness. Now Star Wars fans get in The Force Awakens what is, at times, a shot-for-shot remake of A New Hope (1977). Justly maligned as George Lucas' prequels were, at least they tried to do something different by chronicling the downfall of the Republic and the rise of the Empire (albeit in a plodding, incoherent way)."
Btw, have you seen The Force Awakens yet?
p.s.
If I ever wanted someone killed, I would put a sign on them that said Star Wars Prequels and put them out in front of your house before you woke up.
Going to the Arclight.. I know I know what I said before, but I'm not standing in line again, and we just got back from 2 malls and they were packed. I'll pay a premium not to stand in line and kind of regret not doing so to begin with.
Still haven't seen TFA (and you all may be talking about this in the spoiler thread), but with what I've heard about TFA this makes it seem like the next and future films will move the story forward more than the homage laden launching point that it sounds like the TFA was.
I know JJ co-wrote the film so he doesn't have much to bitch about, but I wonder if Disney brought him in and told him to deliver a very nostalgia driven Star Wars film, a greatest hits if you will, to win back all the fans that had forsaken the franchise after the prequels and JJ would have preferred to do something more original (again, I can't really comment on TFA so maybe I won't see it that way when I watch the film)?
Still haven't seen TFA (and you all may be talking about this in the spoiler thread), but with what I've heard about TFA this makes it seem like the next and future films will move the story forward more than the homage laden launching point that it sounds like the TFA was.
I know JJ co-wrote the film so he doesn't have much to bitch about, but I wonder if Disney brought him in and told him to deliver a very nostalgia driven Star Wars film, a greatest hits if you will, to win back all the fans that had forsaken the franchise after the prequels and JJ would have preferred to do something more original (again, I can't really comment on TFA so maybe I won't see it that way when I watch the film)?
From what I've read, Abrams and Disney mutually parted ways due to "creative differences."
From my understanding, Abrams is really only involved in a financial way at this point.
Disney (Bob Iger & Co.) apparently weren't happy that Abrams scraped Arndt's original script and started over from scratch claiming they were essentially out of time. Arndt's script was apparently much different than TFA and the original treatments that were approved by both Disney and Abrams.
Regardless, Abrams dismissed him due to "time constraints" and apparently still didn't want to work under a particular executive producer, probably meaning George Lucas - hence Kennedy bringing in Kasdan.
In Abrams defense, he wasn't happy that Iger was insisting on releasing Dec 18th 2015 instead of in late May 2016; which is what Kennedy wanted as well, as the film would have been substantially more profitable but Iger would've received a smaller share due to his contract expiring in the coming months.
I can see Abrams being pissed about it, he'd stand to lose substantially because Iger wanted an early release; but his insistence on total control over the franchise was a bit odd considering Empire and ROTJ were collaborative efforts.
A lot of politicking, but there apparently was sufficient creative difference for them to not bring Abrams back and instead hire Rian Johnson to take over the writing projects. I think this was also why they brought in Chris Trevorrow, in case Johnson's film didn't pan wel. Note that Kasdan isn't returning either as he was brought in by Kennedy when Abrams essentially fired Arndt.
Abrams still has a financial stake in Star Wars though, but that's it as far as I know.. he's done with the films.
No spoilers, but I think most people, regardless of how you feel about the movie, would likely agree that Abrams' departure is good for the franchise moving forward. I'm excited to see where Johnson takes Star Wars.
From what I've read, Abrams and Disney mutually parted ways due to "creative differences."
From my understanding, Abrams is really only involved in a financial way at this point.
Disney (Bob Iger & Co.) apparently weren't happy that Abrams scraped Arndt's original script, which was apparently much different that TFA, and refused to work under anyone (probably meaning George Lucas).
Abrams wasn't happy that Iger was insisting on releasing Dec 18th 2015 instead of in late May 2016; which is what Kennedy wanted as well, as the film would have been substantially more profitable but Iger would've received a smaller share due to his contract expiring in the coming months.
I can see Abrams being pissed about it, but his insistence on total control over the franchise is a bit odd considering Empire and ROTJ were collaborative efforts.
A lot of politicking, but there apparently was sufficient creative difference for them to hire Rian Johnson to take over the projects. Note that Kasdan isn't returning either. Abrams still has a financial stake in Star Wars though, but that's it as far as I know.. he's done with the films.
No spoilers, but I think most people, regardless of how you feel about the movie, would likely agree that Abrams' departure is good for the franchise moving forward.
I knew he was staying on as an Exec producer, but that's generally a jerkoff position on a film so it doesn't surprise me that his creative input is pretty much null.
I also obviously knew that Arndt's script was rejected by JJ, and I really hope it leaks someday. I was looking forward to see what emotion he would put in the franchise since he got me to cry over Toy Story 3 and Little Miss Sunshine was a touching film as well.
Interesting to learn about the personal financial motivations for the release date, too.
I'm excited for Rian Johnson though, as he's clearly a talented filmmaker. He has a darker sense too, so I wonder if we are set up for the ESB effect in this trilogy. I'm a little worried about the third film since I wasn't that impressed with Jurassic World, but I guess we can wait to worry about that until we're there.
I knew he was staying on as an Exec producer, but that's generally a jerkoff position on a film so it doesn't surprise me that his creative input is pretty much null.
I also obviously knew that Arndt's script was rejected by JJ, and I really hope it leaks someday. I was looking forward to see what emotion he would put in the franchise since he got me to cry over Toy Story 3 and Little Miss Sunshine was a touching film as well.
Interesting to learn about the personal financial motivations for the release date, too.
I'm excited for Rian Johnson though, as he's clearly a talented filmmaker. He has a darker sense too, so I wonder if we are set up for the ESB effect in this trilogy. I'm a little worried about the third film since I wasn't that impressed with Jurassic World, but I guess we can wait to worry about that until we're there.
Agree 100%.. Trevorrow seems like a not so great choice. Not so sure why they didn't get a more established director.
Personally, I thought Lucas/Kasdan would've been fine as a writing team, and Spielberg who is Lucas' best friend for life would've been a solid pick for director. But maybe after how poor Crystal Skull was, Disney said fuck all of that... He ruled himself out early in the process anyway though, maybe because Lucas had been so marginalized.
All Disney had to say was "no kids.." But whatevs..
p.s.
I also agree with a comment you made awhile ago; these films are being rushed... There's no reason Episode IX should have a crew already, and you would think if you knew you were doing a trilogy you'd actually write the entire trilogy out first before filming the first movie.
Instead, Episode VII will very likely have a very different look, feel and vibe to the next two due to "creative differences."
Personally, I thought Lucas/Kasdan would've been fine as a writing team, and Spielberg who is Lucas' best friend for life would've been a solid pick for director. He ruled himself out early in the process, maybe because Lucas had been so marginalized.
I don't know. I would be worried that Spielberg wouldn't shut down Lucas' bad ideas like what happened on Indy 4. I'm fine with Lucas being gone from the series. He could have made 7, 8, and 9 if he wanted to but decided to sit on the property for most of the time he was on it.
Like, what the fuck do they do in 2019 when this shit is up? Are they gonna sit on it for a few more years and then put out another trilogy? If they are going ahead in time and the characters from these movies don't die, then I would assume you would keep making more. Or do they go way back in time and make a KOTOR trilogy?
It's going to be really interesting to see what they do, but I kinda wish they would give a little more breathing room to this thing especially with the one-offs in between. Annualization is taking over everything now and I really wish that wasn't the case.
I mean, I get it. He was an up and comer after "Safety Not Guaranteed" (which I liked) and then brought in the mega big bucks with "Jurassic World."
After his work on JW I could see why they would pick him if what they are mostly looking for from this trilogy is the nostalgia grab.
I don't know. I would be worried that Spielberg wouldn't shut down Lucas' bad ideas like what happened on Indy 4. I'm fine with Lucas being gone from the series. He could have made 7, 8, and 9 if he wanted to but decided to sit on the property for most of the time he was on it.
Like, what the fuck do they do in 2019 when this shit is up? Are they gonna sit on it for a few more years and then put out another trilogy? If they are going ahead in time and the characters from these movies don't die, then I would assume you would keep making more. Or do they go way back in time and make a KOTOR trilogy?
It's going to be really interesting to see what they do, but I kinda wish they would give a little more breathing room to this thing especially with the one-offs in between. Annualization is taking over everything now and I really wish that wasn't the case.
From what I've read, Abrams and Disney mutually parted ways due to "creative differences."
From my understanding, Abrams is really only involved in a financial way at this point.
Disney (Bob Iger & Co.) apparently weren't happy that Abrams scraped Arndt's original script and started over from scratch claiming they were essentially out of time. Arndt's script was apparently much different than TFA and the original treatments that were approved by both Disney and Abrams.
Regardless, Abrams dismissed him due to "time constraints" and apparently still didn't want to work under a particular executive producer, probably meaning George Lucas - hence Kennedy bringing in Kasdan.
In Abrams defense, he wasn't happy that Iger was insisting on releasing Dec 18th 2015 instead of in late May 2016; which is what Kennedy wanted as well, as the film would have been substantially more profitable but Iger would've received a smaller share due to his contract expiring in the coming months.
I can see Abrams being pissed about it, he'd stand to lose substantially because Iger wanted an early release; but his insistence on total control over the franchise was a bit odd considering Empire and ROTJ were collaborative efforts.
A lot of politicking, but there apparently was sufficient creative difference for them to not bring Abrams back and instead hire Rian Johnson to take over the writing projects. I think this was also why they brought in Chris Trevorrow, in case Johnson's film didn't pan wel. Note that Kasdan isn't returning either as he was brought in by Kennedy when Abrams essentially fired Arndt.
Abrams still has a financial stake in Star Wars though, but that's it as far as I know.. he's done with the films.
No spoilers, but I think most people, regardless of how you feel about the movie, would likely agree that Abrams' departure is good for the franchise moving forward. I'm excited to see where Johnson takes Star Wars.
It's from a bunch of different reports over the past year, not a single report. I've been following this film since it was leaked the Mark Hamill and Carrie Fisher agreed to return for Episode VII.
I'd have to piece together the particular sources, but, a lot of it is easy to find. Here's the bullet points and some third-party news articles:
1) Initial release was intended for Summer 2015, but Iger would not allow the film to be pushed back until Summer 2016. Kathleen Kennedy and the creative staff had asked for considerably more time and were rejected. Abrams is mentioned as taking over creative responsibilities, scrapping everything and being "autocratic" in the process:
2) Michael Ardnt's script was based on George Lucas' original story and was scrapped by Abrams when Abrams essentially fires him. This is now more widely sourced as Ardnt has come out with a few details about his story compared to TFA:
"If you wondered why there hasn’t been any real news on the Star Wars Episode VII front, this is likely a big part of the reason. The script Michael Arndt was writing (likely based on George Lucas‘ original outline) is no longer in play. Instead, J.J. Abrams and Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi screenwriter Lawrence Kasdan are scripting."
3) Ardnt wasn't part of the Abrams/Kasdan pair because of creative differences due to him sticking to Lucas' originally intended treatment (the part that Disney approved):
"According to The Hollywood Reporter, insider sources claim Ardnt wanted to focus on the children of Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill), Han Solo (Harrison Ford) and Princess Leia (Carrie Fisher), but director J.J. Abrams had a different vision for the movie.
Abrams wanted the movie’s plot to focus on the original cast members, sort of a final farewell to them as they transitioned to the next generation."
That article goes on into some speculation about who would and wouldn't be cast and someone being a descendant of Obi-Wan Kenobi (potential spoilers?).
4) Iger's motivations were made clear in a Forbes article last week, but this week there's a Fortune article that goes into breakdown of his salary.
"
In fact, recent public filings show that Bob Iger’s total compensation for 2015 dipped 3.4% from last year to $44.9 million. Broken down, that (still, very healthy) sum includes $2.5 million in base salary, $8.9 million in company stock, another $8.4 million in options, and a whopping $22.3 million performance-based bonus, among other compensation.
Last year, Iger pulled in $46.5 million as Disney’s chief executive, which actually represented a bump of more than 35% from his compensation the previous year.
In a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on Wednesday, Disney ran through a list of Iger’s accomplishments as CEO in 2015, including “record-breaking enthusiasm” for Star Wars: The Force Awakens, as well as other box office hits such as Pixar’s Inside Out and Marvel’s Avengers sequel. The company also noted growth in Disney’s theme parks segment while Fortune got a shout-out in the filing for naming Disney one of its World’s Most Admired Companies this year."
In 2013, Iger was to officially retire at the end of this year (this was extended recently to 2018), so at the time of his insistence that this film be released in 2015, he had a substantial financial incentive in the tens of millions of dollars.
That's just for starters.. :chuckles: This movie has had more press than any I can remember in recent memory.
Yeah man, I think, again, you totally misunderstand the story. Please, try to hear me out on this.
1) You said this was retconned, but that isn't true at all. A lot of people make the mistake of thinking "if it wasn't fully explained on screen, well, Lucas never intended it. It must be a retcon."
The draft scripts and notes from the 70s show that Anakin Skywalker/Starkiller was always intended to be the hero of the entire saga. He was always supposed to be "brash" and overly "cocky." This character was separated into two people, Anakin and Luke, with Anakin becoming a fallen savior-like figure and Luke being his child. Anakin would ultimately be led to redemption through his son's actions.
There are plenty of ideas that COULD'VE happened if George had full control of the original trilogy but they are better off without a lot of them. Star Wars was saved in editing, Lucas' draft notes aren't exactly gospel to what's best for the universe/story.
While there is plenty of retconning in the prequels, this isn't one of those instances.
2) "He was just some high-ranking Empire guy." No he wasn't. "The son of Skywalker must not become a Jedi." That's straight out of ESB. The entire reason they are after Luke, is because Anakin is the greatest of all Jedi.
Not precisely IMO. It's not just that Anakin was the best, but he's the last of that ancient religion. The Emperor understands the power of the Force and does not want a new Jedi to rises from the ashes and challenge their control.
Vader isn't even in the Imperial Government or Imperial Navy, he gives orders by proxy, similarly to a political officer on a Soviet ship. You can see this when the subordinates look to their superiors before accepting Vader's commands. He speaks for the Emperor as his right-hand, and every chance someone gets to attempt to chastise Vader they take it.
3) The entire Star Wars story is about "Space Jesus." That was the point. It's a religious story. The Jedi are essentially a religious order - they are monks and samurai. It's a spiritual story about ethics, morals, beings of light, the afterlife, etc.
The anti-Space Jesus argument is one of many good ones made in the RedLetterMedia reviews. In Star Wars, Vader seems like an SS captain, doing the dirty work and arguing with high ranking officials. He becomes more important in the story because of his relationship with Luke. In the prequels, he is literally a child of virgin birth and this retroactively creates new importance to his character.
Star Wars is a classic story of good versus evil. It's a fantasy film set in space, with lightsabers instead of swords and The Force instead of magic. That's fucking awesome. Retconning some Chosen One prophecy did not help the story or its characters IMO.
Jack, honestly, what is it about Star Wars that you do like? It seems you dislike the very premise of the story.
The biggest among many problems with the prequels is that the characters suck. Even if you make a botched up overly complex story that doesn't really line up with what was established in the OT (how I feel), the movies could have been saved by making the character compelling. Instead, we are given no reason to like ANY of the characters. Even Obi-Wan is mostly saved by Ewan's performance and the fact that we already knew him as a character. We are never given a reason to like Anakin and so it means less when Darth Vader kills him.
That's why I think TFA is head and shoulders above the prequels (even though I rank it 4th). All of the characters are either likable or interesting. They seemed like real people for the most part. I had my issues with the film but it felt like we got to go back to that universe for real this time.
Anyway, Gour, you can enjoy the prequels, that's quite alright. Feel free to defend them even. But I think they are plagued with fundamental issues (from story to characters to acting to writing to technical direction) that make them bad movies and poor pieces of the overall saga.
EDIT: The politics of Abrams and Disney as detailed above make me worried about the direction of this trilogy. Also, didn't realize that whole deal with the December versus May release. While I really liked the film, no doubt it could have used more time in editing to maybe work out some pacing issues that I've read a lot of complaints about. Also, if I'm not mistaken, this was the first Star Wars not released in May.
The biggest among many problems with the prequels is that the characters suck. Even if you make a botched up overly complex story that doesn't really line up with what was established in the OT (how I feel), the movies could have been saved by making the character compelling.
If you mean specifically this, that we're given no reason to like any of the characters; I'm with you 100%. We aren't.
I've said for some time the direction and execution of the prequel films is awful. The film doesn't really lend itself to the viewer easily, and instead feels almost like a play - a poorly acted and scripted play that is far more distant in feel and sensation than it should be.
However, the characters themselves, within the confines of the story (not the film) do work and are well thought out. The problem is that Lucas just couldn't get those characters to come to life on the screen.
Even Obi-Wan is mostly saved by Ewan's performance and the fact that we already knew him as a character. We are never given a reason to like Anakin and so it means less when Darth Vader kills him.
I think this is the logical (false) dilemma a lot of viewers keep finding themselves in.
The Force Awakens is good, because it's better than the prequels.. which aren't good... So better than bad is good, by definition, right?
Once we go down the road of describing how the prequels failed in order to justify why The Force Awakens doesn't, then we know we're really not talking about TFA but instead of the previous 3 movies.
The Force Awakens is bad for an entirely different set of reasons than the prequels.
See, this is where you and I differ. They didn't feel like "real people" to me, but instead caricatures. Hear me out for a moment...
Rey has been described by many as a Mary Sue character, or in essence, she has no limitations, is exceptionally good at basically everything, lacks any obvious vulnerability, and exceeds all expectations. This is a trademark of bad writing.
More to the point, we know nothing more about Rey by the end of the film than we did at the beginning. She was kicking everyone's ass then, and she was still doing it by the end of the movie. Nothing changed and she didn't really develop as a character; the only thing that happened was that the plot moved around her.
Finn is exactly the same way, although it might not be so obvious. We might think we see a Stormtrooper have a crisis of conscious and decide to forgo his responsibilities and "run." But when does that actually happen?
The very first scene of the movie, Finn never fires a single shot. We actually never see "Stormtrooper FN-2814" because he's essentially always Finn. He never has a crisis of conscious because he is obviously quite certain of what he's going to do within 5 minutes of the opening crawl. This isn't character development.
Some might say he wants to "run," and then joins the rebellion - but he himself says "I'm just here to save Rey" ... But why? If it's love at first sight, I guess I understand, but that's never really mentioned.
You could say it's analogous to Luke wanting to save the Princess, but he initially turns down that prospect, only leaving with Obi Wan when he finds his aunt and uncle brutally butchered by the Empire.
So... again, no real development.
Poe Dameron? Captain Phasma? General Hux? Snoke? ... We'll skip those guys for obvious reasons.
Han Solo? Abrams actually devolves the character, almost senselessly, not into a smuggler but instead an actual thief. Solo was never intended to be a thief, nor does it make sense that this is his station in life given his past.
There's really no rhyme or reason as to why he and Chewy are just floating around in space wherever they happen to bump into Rey and Finn and the Falcon.
This is all quite the contrivance, his character, how they meet, all of it.. It's horrible writing and direction and editing.
Luke Skywalker.... just.. smh....
They were so worried he would expose the fact that we really didn't get much of a new story that he was given no lines?
Leia? There's really no point in her even being in the movie. Her lines were awfully scripted, and she delivered them in a pretty painful looking manner. I'm not judging her ability to act; I'm saying she didn't fit within the scenes that weren't cut from the film.
So that leaves us with Kylo Ren, the one character who was developed on screen.
But developed, backwards?
He goes from being incredibly powerful, to almost meager, from start to finish..
You can find thousands of people online saying that this really bothered them, as it doesn't really make a lot of sense. Sure, we can sit here and try to rationalize how it could make sense; but within the confines of the film, it doesn't make sense - and no that doesn't mean the viewer should use their imagination, it means the direction of the film wasn't well thought out.
Occam's Razor tells me that this more than likely means that when Abrams needed Ren to be tough, he was, and when he needed Rey to be tougher, so she was.
Just like his other films, he doesn't really care about continuity, coherence between acts in a film, or rational story telling (not scientifically accurate; but logically self-consistent). You can see this trend throughout his films.
And for me, it felt like we were watching a movie that was pretending to be Star Wars. The prequels, for all their flaws, do feel like Star Wars...
This movie was the first Star Wars movie that was not really an Adventure film but instead an Action film.
This was the first Star Wars film that really never, not for a single moment lasting more than a few seconds (save the end scene), allowed the audience to settle down, think, and reflect on what was happening.
Compare the first act of A New Hope with the two droids to this.. Compare the serene jungle scenes in Empire with the wild chaos in this film. There are no real moments of reflection in the movie at all.. It just runs, at a sprinting pace, from action scene to action scene.
I think there are 7 action scenes in the very first act of the film?
I'm not sure how this is getting back to Star Wars? Star Wars wasn't ever an action film.
Understand me when I say, it's okay for people to like The Force Awakens. I'm still actively recommending friends and family to go see it and enjoy it. I don't tell them how I feel about the movie, because I don't want to ruin it.
As far as the prequels... I think I did enjoy ROTS more than TFA, I'm not entirely sure.. It's hard to say, but for me the films are close. For all the faults in those films, they were at least original ideas.
But I think they are plagued with fundamental issues (from story to characters to acting to writing to technical direction) that make them bad movies and poor pieces of the overall saga.
But, they are Star Wars, from the creator himself. They might fail, cinematically, in areas where TFA succeeds (it does demonstrate superior execution in many respects); the prequels still tell a story. I left TFA feeling as though I didn't know anything more than I did when I sat down.
No real story was told, and the reason seems to be because Abrams didn't want to write one in the time allotted. Instead, we got a reboot of A New Hope as somewhat of a placeholder for the next iteration of Star Wars. This was nothing more than an appetizer of a film, and we'll have to wait until Episode VIII and see if Rian Johnson can develop a coherent story.
EDIT: The politics of Abrams and Disney as detailed above make me worried about the direction of this trilogy. Also, didn't realize that whole deal with the December versus May release. While I really liked the film, no doubt it could have used more time in editing to maybe work out some pacing issues that I've read a lot of complaints about. Also, if I'm not mistaken, this was the first Star Wars not released in May.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
