Rise of Skywalker - Page 7 - Myth-Weavers


General Discussion

All-purpose section for discussions that don’t clearly belong in any of the other categories.


Rise of Skywalker

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Golarionman View Post
There is a lot of bad in the EU and some stuffs that are okay. Honestly, wiping the EU or at least not make it canon, was the best idea. People can still enjoy their EU stories...not like they are gone. It is just not part of the canon storyline.
An adaption of the Thrawn trilogy and the Solo kids would have Disney printing more money right now compared to the storm they have going. I dont argue that there is a some bad stuff amid the EU. Clearly it would need to get changed for the box office or TV series. I'm fairly confident that a vast majority of fans though would have eagerly accepted the Solos and their friends to pass the torch compared to Poe, Finn, and Rey. Kylo Ren is clearly Jaycen Solo going Darth Caedus, just done horribly wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFred View Post
Also, it's been a lot of years since A New Hope came out. Even as someone who rarely re-reads books or re-watches films, I don't really mind seeing the same thing again if it's nearly 40 years later.
I’m not sure that “saw
”A New Hope” is silly. There, I said it!
Star Wars once forty years ago and has never watched it in the interim” is that large a demographic. But I can see that for someone younger, the same point is probably true enough — why not see the same plot done in some respects better (certainly diversity and effects)?

However, there are a couple more ways in which (to me personally) it comes across as less than effective. One has to do with the original, the second with the copy.

The first is that one of the things about Star Wars that none of its successors have is that it’s a film by someone who’s never seen Star Wars. (Cf. Tolkien: one of the ways in which The Lord of the Rings is different from subsequent epic fantasy is that it’s by someone who’s never read The Lord of the Rings.) This is not to say that Star Wars is not a film that refers back to stuff. Quite the opposite: it’s full of references to Westerns, to samurai films, and (especially in the parts that The Force Awakens imitates), World War II movies. (There have been some comments about the original films being dumb, and in some ways they definitely are. But there are some ways in which Star Wars is a more intelligent film than people are giving it credit for being: Lucas in the ‘70s was an extremely film-literate director who had done his homework very thoroughly.) It’s about taking other genres and viewing them through an SF lens. It’s inherently more interesting for me to see the original Death Star sequence and think about how it’s reinventing The Dam Busters than it is to see the Starkiller Base sequence — which is adding what, exactly, beyond better effects? (I don’t care too much about effects. There is a reason why my pseudonym is taken from classic Doctor Who.)

The second is that it runs counter to something that I like about The Force Awakens. The First Order have touches of being the ersatz and so always second-best (at best) Empire, a bunch of imperial nostalgists who are a bit inadequate and crap because they’re imperial nostalgists. (Domhnall Gleason is really good at getting that across in his big speech, but I’m not going to pretend that it’s something that the film develops coherently.) But it undercuts that to depend so extensively in your conclusion on producing your own ersatz nostalgic remake. Basically, it would have been more effective for me if this had been reversed: if the nostalgic material had been more concentrated at the beginning, and then the film had gone somewhere different at the end.

Quote:
Originally Posted by leons1701 View Post
Every time I see someone say Star Wars is bombing at the box office, I know they are so far disconnected from reality that there is no point in continuing the discussion..
It's this reality. A $275 million budget, unknown hundred million in marketing for a return of $392 million? There's a reason the breaks have suddenly been hit on the envisioned Star Wars Movie Every Year and the franchise is taking a break after Episode 9.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bananaphone View Post
It's this reality. A $275 million budget, unknown hundred million in marketing for a return of $392 million? There's a reason the breaks have suddenly been hit on the envisioned Star Wars Movie Every Year and the franchise is taking a break after Episode 9.
It's not just the $275M budget. It's generally safe to assume marketing is at least the same budget, so a safe bet is to double what the studios say is the budget (of course, they don't want to actually release the real numbers, investors and all that). But if i remember right, Solo was some 90% done and then scrapped and completely re-shot. So probably triple that, easily. So it needs to make around $825M just to break even.

The whole Disney SW thing is a mess. It's all over the place with production and all the issues going on, both between the people making the movies and those in management. Since it's going on hiatus, maybe they'll sit down and look at things and figure out a decent outline of things.

Solo didn't do very well. I haven't seen it, so I can't really comment on that. On the one hand, a spin-off not doing very well is not actually that surprising, though everyone loved Hans Solo so maybe it is. Either way, Episodes 7 and 8 not only did well, they did very well - The Force Awakens especially is one of the highest-grossing films of all time, adjusted for inflation, and both got rave reviews from both audiences and critics in addition to being massive commercial successes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArcaneDesperado View Post
An adaption of the Thrawn trilogy and the Solo kids would have Disney printing more money right now compared to the storm they have going.
So instead of smashing the box office with three hugely successful films that most people loved, they should have adapted some books nobody's ever heard of (remember that the vast majority of people who go to see these films are not obsessive Star Wars fans and have probably never heard of the "extended universe" or read a Star Wars book - I certainly never have), with the actors who are now too old to play their roles, and then they would have been printing money instead of... wait, what are they doing now? Oh yeah, printing money.

Honestly, even if Disney made 20 awful Star Wars films and one good one, that's still one good film more than we'd have had if the franchise had stayed dead. As it is, even if Solo was a flop, that's still a three out of four hit rate. It's not like every film from the first six was perfect.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFred View Post
Solo didn't do very well. I haven't seen it, so I can't really comment on that. On the one hand, a spin-off not doing very well is not actually that surprising, though everyone loved Hans Solo so maybe it is. Either way, Episodes 7 and 8 not only did well, they did very well - The Force Awakens especially is one of the highest-grossing films of all time, adjusted for inflation, and both got rave reviews from both audiences and critics in addition to being massive commercial successes.
So instead of smashing the box office with three hugely successful films that most people loved, they should have adapted some books nobody's ever heard of (remember that the vast majority of people who go to see these films are not obsessive Star Wars fans and have probably never heard of the "extended universe" or read a Star Wars book - I certainly never have), with the actors who are now too old to play their roles, and then they would have been printing money instead of... wait, what are they doing now? Oh yeah, printing money.

Honestly, even if Disney made 20 awful Star Wars films and one good one, that's still one good film more than we'd have had if the franchise had stayed dead. As it is, even if Solo was a flop, that's still a three out of four hit rate. It's not like every film from the first six was perfect.
"The vast majority of people who go to see these films are not obsessive Star Wars Marvel fans and have probably never read a Star Wars book Marvel comic."
Strangely Disney however has been able to take all the Marvel material and adapt things into a hugely successful franchise while still mostly keeping said more obsessive fans happy. Star Wars on the other hand basically said screw all that pre-existing material rather than adapt it. My point is, "Why?" Yes, you can pull numbers and claim its still making money for the House of Mouse in the box office It's going off name recognition. The toys however sit on the shelves years after the fact. Disney might have done fine with the box office, but they are NOT making the money in merchandising that they should be. Star Wars is more than just the movie(s). The real money comes from everything else. The movies are one giant commercial. Annual reports for the last several years have show a decline.

Rogue One merch sold better than the Last Jedi. A spinoff is selling better than one of your tentpole trilogy movies. That's a bad thing. http://www.jeditemplearchives.com/20...rs-in-decline/

Adapting the Solo kids from the books however would have been a much better alternative. Kids shows with them on adventures. Ya know, actually having material aimed at the target audience that these films are made for. Not middle aged men that argue on the internet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whosit View Post
During that discussion, I pointed out how I hated the Resistance bombers that "dropped" bombs in space and that it broke my suspension of disbelief.
I think this is the crux of what annoys me about the new movies. Too often they have decided for no particularly good reason to throw out rules with space travel and force use established by the previous movies for no particularly good reason.

For example - if you look at Starwars Wookieepedia "Hyperspace" the very first line is "Hyperspace was an alternate dimension" yet, in TLJ they just disregarded that for a set piece (which admittedly looked very cool). If you think about it further - they abandoned a large number of other ships previous to this moment, which, if we are going by what happened at the end, all could of been used in the same manner. Actually, if what they did worked, why wouldn't space warfare be entirely based around flinging giant pieces of metal at the speed of light at other ships?

For me, as problematic as the prequels were, they were consistent with the Universe established in the Original Trilogy. They didn't break my suspension so to speak - I think that's what has annoyed me the most, is how they basically just are doing whatever they want if they think it looks cool. The Force in particular has been a toy they use for plot without really caring about consistency.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFred View Post
Solo didn't do very well. I haven't seen it, so I can't really comment on that. On the one hand, a spin-off not doing very well is not actually that surprising, though everyone loved Hans Solo so maybe it is. Either way, Episodes 7 and 8 not only did well, they did very well - The Force Awakens especially is one of the highest-grossing films of all time, adjusted for inflation, and both got rave reviews from both audiences and critics in addition to being massive commercial successes.
Han Solo isn't a terrible movie, but it felt needless to be a Star Wars movie. Like, people would've loved a good Space Western Heist movie, but in the end it felt like the Star Wars aspect, and them trying to shoe horn it into the Universe they are creating made it a worse movie. I, and I know quite a few other people as well, consider Rogue One the best, or perhaps second best movie, so it's not a spinoff thing.

I think this last movie will be the tester. Just how many people are going not watch Episode 9 due to how much they dislike Episode 8. I think in the end too many people will be curious. They will go. They might hate it. They might know they will hate it. But they want to know for sure, so they will go anyways. I am probably in the same boat. I will have nothing better to do this christmas, so I may as well check it out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArcaneDesperado View Post
...For me the franchise is dead in terms of the movies, short of some mind blowing change that comes with Episode IX. I have the old comics/books. I can probably find the old games on PC. Raging isnt worth the effort. I'm just disappointed at such wasted potential of plots/characters/themes discarded for what we have gotten in its place.
This is kinda how I am. I almost feel numb at this point. Not a single character that I can really get behind and cheer for. Poe Dameron, maybe?

On the flip side, Dave Fiolini (Can never remember how to spell his name for some reason) is involved with The Mandalorian TV show, so that might actually be good.

One problem with adapting the Thrawn books at this point is that Ruhk was killed in the Rebels cartoon. Sure, he could easily be replaced by another--maybe even a son with the same name? Rebels did an excellent job of capturing what I consider to be true Star Wars. It was able to make use of some of the good EU without grabbing the baggage of the... lesser material. I'd love to see that continued.

Rumors of a TV show based on X-Wing pilots (maybe even the X-Wing novels) have been circulating for so long I wonder that it wasn't just fanboy wishing. Lost potential for something interesting there...

I stumbled over some old articles recently back when Rogue One was just a title drop and a lot of people thought it was going to be an X-Wing movie.








Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Last Database Backup 2019-07-20 09:00:07am local time
Myth-Weavers Status