Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens (USE SPOILER TAGS!)

[The Edge]

Anybody seen this dumbass snob critic?

Return of the Jedi Star Wars Nightline Discussion - YouTube

[AmrlKJaneway]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

No one sings on screen in Bambi or Fantasia.

It was only a couple of days ago when I was telling my wife that I couldn't think of a strait Disney cartoon, not Pixar or anything, that wasn't a musical. I had a poor list of examples including Tangled and the two that I own.

Now I'm seeing how wrong I was. And it was only a couple of days before that that I bought, and watched, Atlantis. And I've owned Dinosaur for a couple years now...

[Cook]

Originally Posted by aiman04

For me wooden acting first and foremost shows the failure to the actors themselves. Actors must do their job, bring out all the skills and emotions, imagining things is part of the challenge even in contemporary drama and theaters. When we see bad acting, it's both the actor's bad for not able to perform, and to the director for approving it. I've seen many movies with bad scripts and direction can be saved by performances of the actors, often I heard "that actor was the only good thing in that movie". So in my opinion it's not fair to put the blame entirely on the director.

I would agree wth you but Christopher Lee debunks this nothion. The man is a legend in the industry. If he can't overcome it no one can. Putting a person in a solid green screen room and expecting them to "act" is ridiculous on the directors's part. Heck Ian McKellen lost his shit on Peter Jackson on the Hobbit set when he was put into a solid green screen room. Jackson, unlike Lucas, changed his tactics and found a way around it that was accomadating to McKellen and worked for the film. Actors just don't learn nor do they normally act this way, Its sterile and foreign to them.

Now, am I saying that it can't be done? No because films like 300 have shown that actors can work in largely green screen environments, but it comes down to the director. When you are working in a 90% greenscreen environment the actors rely heavily on the director to direct them, and its no secret that Lucas isn't good with his cast. He is quiet, shy, and thinks like a documentary director. He wants to get all the pieces done and create and fix the product in editing. It makes for a difficult environment for the cast.

[Bluyoda]

Originally Posted by Cook

I would agree wth you but Christopher Lee debunks this nothion. The man is a legend in the industry. If he can't overcome it no one can. Putting a person in a solid green screen room and expecting them to "act" is ridiculous on the directors's part. Heck Ian McKellen lost his shit on Peter Jackson on the Hobbit set when he was put into a solid green screen room. Jackson, unlike Lucas, changed his tactics and found a way around it that was accomadating to McKellen and worked for the film. Actors just don't learn nor do they normally act this way, Its sterile and foreign to them.

Now, am I saying that it can't be done? No because films like 300 have shown that actors can work in largely green screen environments, but it comes down to the director. When you are working in a 90% greenscreen environment the actors rely heavily on the director to direct them, and its no secret that Lucas isn't good with his cast. He is quiet, shy, and thinks like a documentary director. He wants to get all the pieces done and create and fix the product in editing. It makes for a difficult environment for the cast.

Christopher Lee was excellent in the prequels.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by Cook

I would agree wth you but Christopher Lee debunks this nothion. The man is a legend in the industry. If he can't overcome it no one can. Putting a person in a solid green screen room and expecting them to "act" is ridiculous on the directors's part. Heck Ian McKellen lost his shit on Peter Jackson on the Hobbit set when he was put into a solid green screen room. Jackson, unlike Lucas, changed his tactics and found a way around it that was accomadating to McKellen and worked for the film. Actors just don't learn nor do they normally act this way, Its sterile and foreign to them.

Now, am I saying that it can't be done? No because films like 300 have shown that actors can work in largely green screen environments, but it comes down to the director. When you are working in a 90% greenscreen environment the actors rely heavily on the director to direct them, and its no secret that Lucas isn't good with his cast. He is quiet, shy, and thinks like a documentary director. He wants to get all the pieces done and create and fix the product in editing. It makes for a difficult environment for the cast.

Actors work on blank stages all the time, or in empty rehearsal rooms, or even outside in the parking lot. Preparation is part of the process, and it is exceedingly rare that the process begins on a finished set, in full costume, with lights and sound and props. Of course, there are roles in which you just have to imagine you're looking at a giant robot and your dialog is of the "Run! Go now!" variety. Not a lot of prep for that, other than being in shape.

[Buddy Ackerman]

For what it's worth, I don't think we'll get Episode VII in May 2015. When you have something as big as Avengers 2 which, if like the first, will run and run for weeks, why risk it losing screens and attention - especially 3D and IMAX screens - by releasing something equally as big three weeks later? Especially when Disney will also Pixar's Inside Out released on June 19th.

Of course, someone else will release something then but that's a risk other studios will take. And whatever it is it won't be Star Wars, something which would topple even Avengers 2. If you have two possible multi-billion dollar franchises why risk one or both like that? The safe bet would be to space them out, though I don't buy that Star Wars would get shunted into winter as it's a summer film.

I did think that Disney would grab a nice, juicy July spot for Star Wars - maybe that mid-July friday that Warners seem to have a monopoly on at the moment (Dark Knights, Inception, Pacific Rim, Hobbit 3) if they don't grab it for Justice League. But then I remembered Disney have Pirates 5 out in July 2015 so my guess is that if Episode VII does get a 2015 release we'll see it in August - Guradians of the Galaxy's release shows that Disney aren't afraid of putting a film out towards the end of the school holidays. Besides, Star Wars will happily run into September.

[tigertron]

This might be a stupid post, but I don't know why the Avengers 2 couldn't get moved? May is seen as Star Wars month, so I don't know why the Avengers is taking up that space.

[Buddy Ackerman]

Originally Posted by tigertron

This might be a stupid post, but I don't know why the Avengers 2 couldn't get moved? May is seen as Star Wars month, so I don't know why the Avengers is taking up that space.

They could move it but I doubt they will - not only is it further along in pre-production (and so likely ready before Star Wars) and has had that date for a while, the date proved so well for the first one that I don't think they'd want to risk it. Most inportantly though it's the logistics of the Marvel franchise - the filming dates are likely set in stone due to having to time all of the actors' availability (not that they couldn't film it when planned and simply hold back the film of course) but with Ant-Man out later in the year moving back Avengers 2 - likely to August to not clash with Pixar's Inside Out and Pirates 5 - would then impact their release and marketing plans for that.

[Angel Eyes]

I don't ever see a July opening for Star Wars. I think it will be late May regardless of what film is opening that month.

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by tigertron

This might be a stupid post, but I don't know why the Avengers 2 couldn't get moved? May is seen as Star Wars month, so I don't know why the Avengers is taking up that space.

I dont either - Avengers is lame compared to Star Wars. I thought the first one was just another rendition of the sequel Transformer films: Hours and hours of ball-numbing, nonstop mayhem with little substance with which to base it all on. It was BORING.

I dont care what makes more money, Star Wars >>>>>>> Avengers. And it isnt even close.

[legendarymatt92]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Actors work on blank stages all the time, or in empty rehearsal rooms, or even outside in the parking lot. Preparation is part of the process, and it is exceedingly rare that the process begins on a finished set, in full costume, with lights and sound and props. Of course, there are roles in which you just have to imagine you're looking at a giant robot and your dialog is of the "Run! Go now!" variety. Not a lot of prep for that, other than being in shape.

I understand where Cook is coming from, though - your points are entirely true, but no one can argue that Lucas is an actor's director. He's not, and I'm quite sure he's admitted that himself. His focus was more on creating impressive CGI, and the actors were put on the back-burner; someone like Lee, who has been working in cinema through big changes, probably couldn't understand how dehumanised film-making had become.

[rickah88]

I just think Disney should make 2013 about 20 months long! I think they have the clout to pull this off. That way, all these great films can be released in 2013.

[cricepng]

If only I were in a country with more than one theater (and that one hundreds of miles away and only accessible to me by an hour flight) in 2015.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by legendarymatt92

I understand where Cook is coming from, though - your points are entirely true, but no one can argue that Lucas is an actor's director. He's not, and I'm quite sure he's admitted that himself. His focus was more on creating impressive CGI, and the actors were put on the back-burner; someone like Lee, who has been working in cinema through big changes, probably couldn't understand how dehumanised film-making had become.

Lee seemed to be having fun in the two SW movies. The technical aspects of shooting on a green set can be difficult for an actor, depending on what's required -- i.e. choreography and hitting eyelines. As for Mr. Lucas, the performances in American Graffiti are stellar, and he directed Alec Guiness to an Oscar nomination. The issues with the acting in the prequels are all due to the screenplays -- the screenplays for the OT passed through many hands, not so much Clones and Sith.

[tilallr1]

I had to chime in here and let you guys know I picked up Vol. 1 for Star Wars: Legacy from Star Wars. After reading it I am hooked, and could easily see them using this as a reference for the new trilogy. It has everything Star Wars fans could possibly want.

[Show spoiler]Darth Talon

[legendarymatt92]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Lee seemed to be having fun in the two SW movies. The technical aspects of shooting on a green set can be difficult for an actor, depending on what's required -- i.e. choreography and hitting eyelines. As for Mr. Lucas, the performances in American Graffiti are stellar, and he directed Alec Guiness to an Oscar nomination. The issues with the acting in the prequels are all due to the screenplays -- the screenplays for the OT passed through many hands, not so much Clones and Sith.

+1 on the screenplays. As many people have pointed out, Lucas simply had too many "yes men" around him who were not prepared to point out the flaws in the scripts when he was making the prequels.

Interesting fact: Guiness had a major problem with the dialogue he was made to say in Star Wars - he's publicly denounced it a few times.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Lee seemed to be having fun in the two SW movies. The technical aspects of shooting on a green set can be difficult for an actor, depending on what's required -- i.e. choreography and hitting eyelines. As for Mr. Lucas, the performances in American Graffiti are stellar, and he directed Alec Guiness to an Oscar nomination. The issues with the acting in the prequels are all due to the screenplays -- the screenplays for the OT passed through many hands, not so much Clones and Sith.

Granted, the writing in the PT was truly dreadful but let's not give the direction too much of a free pass.

American Graffiti and Star Wars were a long time ago.

[Steelmaker]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Lee seemed to be having fun in the two SW movies. The technical aspects of shooting on a green set can be difficult for an actor, depending on what's required -- i.e. choreography and hitting eyelines. As for Mr. Lucas, the performances in American Graffiti are stellar, and he directed Alec Guiness to an Oscar nomination. The issues with the acting in the prequels are all due to the screenplays -- the screenplays for the OT passed through many hands, not so much Clones and Sith.

Here is something that I noticed about the PT. All of the British/foreign actor's performances were fine. All of the American actors struggled. I wonder why that is.

[blonde_devil]

Originally Posted by Steelmaker

Here is something that I noticed about the PT. All of the British/foreign actor's performances were fine. All of the American actors struggled. I wonder why that is.

but aren't Natalie Portman and Hayden Christensen like the only American actors in those movies?

[Buddy Ackerman]

Christopher Lee had absolutely no problem with the directing. In fact, he said after Episode II came out that he preferred Lucas' style to that of Jackson's on LOTR.