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

[Nicky and Sue]

Originally Posted by Breather

I completely understand what you're saying, Ernest. Your original post clearly stated what could happen and what often does happen in acquisitions. You didn't state what will happen in this situation. I understood that from the first reading.

Having worked for an entity that was part of an acquisition myself, it often starts out as a hands-off approach, everything nice with guarantees of autonomy or promises of minimal oversight. Yet, the truth of the matter is, the parent corporation will often slip their own corporate culture and influence in, quite slowly in some instances and quickly in others. And the first time something isn't successful, the overseer will wield their power and begin to make wholesale changes.

If everything goes well, you'll see Kennedy stay in charge. As the release said, she'll be reporting to Alan Horn, and you can be sure Iger as well. If things aren't to their satisfaction, she'll be jettisoned like any other executive. No one spends $4 billion to sit on the sidelines.

I don't think you understood his post at all. Anything "could" happen when there is parent companies. It's pointless to state anything could happen ; Not factoring in how successful and standalone in nature Lucasfilm is, is totally missing the big point also.. It's simply not a company that Disney will feel the need to mess with.

He implied that because we all apparently can't see what happened, that Lucas will be set aside by Disney decree (sooner that we think and has been stated publicly). That would simply not be the case. In Disneys opinion, Lucas would be the one you consult to SAVE any wavering of quality in Star Wars.

Companies aren't Star Wars fanboy turn lucas haters who think the prequels sucked..They look at numbers and perceived global perception and the movies succeeded.. Only on the internet have I heard that Phantom Menace is horrible.

If his and your viewpoint is that if Kennedy helms it poorly she'll be removed...well effin duh. That is my viewpoint too. The idea that if they don't recoup money they would act is blatantly obvious. But all star wars movies succeed and with Kathleen WE (the harsher fans) could like what she does too, with her decisions.

Even if it tanked in the U.S, worldwide it would be eaten up. It would have to be seen publicly as Waterworld and earn less than that movie to have any action upon the planned "Kennedy in charge, lucas consulting on pre-production" setup. Meaning its gonna always be some form of his treatments.

Really we should just be thinking about how awesome is that we will have Lucas stories (but finally none of his uber control, bad directing and writing) mixed with Kathleen bringing in directing and writing talent for the treatments. Finally we may get something that is worshipped by generic folks AND longtime fans.

[Breather]

Originally Posted by Nicky and Sue

I don't think you understood his post at all. Anything "could" happen when there is parent companies. It's pointless to state anything could happen ; Not factoring in how successful and standalone in nature Lucasfilm is, is totally missing the big point also.. It's simply not a company that Disney will feel the need to mess with.

I understood his post perfectly. I think it's you that misunderstood him. He was stating what could happen and he made that clear. Crystal clear. You've obviously never worked in the corporate world. Lucasfilm is successful solely because of Star Wars. Disney bought it for that reason and they clearly stated in their presentation that they wish to make new films and forge into new areas in TV, merchandise and marketing. They also stated that Kennedy will report to Alan Horn, her new boss, along with Iger. Since Disney has made it clear they have new ideas for Star Wars, they won't just sit on the sidelines. They'll clearly set goals for Kennedy and if they're not met, well.

He implied that because we all apparently can't see what happened, that Lucas will be set aside by Disney decree (sooner that we think and has been stated publicly). That would simply not be the case. In Disneys opinion, Lucas would be the one you consult to SAVE any wavering of quality in Star Wars.

Ernest never implied that but Lucas is leaving of his own accord. He sold the company. Lucas and others have made it clear that his involvement will be quite minimal. Kathleen Kennedy stated that she'd still like him to be on her shoulder. He jokingly said he's working on a hologram. He clearly wants out. He sold his company for $4 billion dollars, is 68 years old, expressed his desire to retire and get more involved in philanthropy, and has been in a serious relationship for the past 5 years. He won't be greatly involved, if at all. It was pretty clear from the video he did with her.

"Creative consultant" is often a ceremonial moniker used by marketing departments to maintain fan interest by showing that a certain person is "involved" in the project. He isn't writing the script, producing, or directing. I don't even think this so-called treatment is as extensive as it's made out to be. In the video, Kennedy stated that she hired a couple of writers to work on "ideas" and a script. Lucas mentioned her having many different sources like novels, comics, etc. to draw from. Reading between the lines, it sounds like he gave nothing more than a very broad outline, with no plot as of yet. It's not at script stage. Scripts get revised, rewritten, thrown out, etc. They're not even there yet. By the time they're done, his outline could be a memory. We don't know.

Companies aren't Star Wars fanboy turn lucas haters who think the prequels sucked..They look at numbers and perceived global perception and the movies succeeded.. Only on the internet have I heard that Phantom Menace is horrible.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding who you're aiming this at, but if not, I'll ask. Who is a Star Wars fanboy Lucas "hater" here? Not Ernest who you took out of context. Surely not me. Who here stated that the prequels weren't financially successful? It seems you've invented a few straw men to argue against instead of what was actually said.

Even if it tanked in the U.S, worldwide it would be eaten up. It would have to be seen publicly as Waterworld and earn less than that movie to have any action upon the planned "Kennedy in charge, lucas consulting on pre-production" setup. Meaning its gonna always be some form of his treatments.

Completely disagree here. If it tanks in the US, regardless of worldwide box office, she would be in trouble. Not that it would. Star Wars films make money regardless of quality. I call it the concept of the built-in fanbase. Fans will go no matter their thoughts on the previous film, because they always believe the next one will "get it right" or recapture the magic.

I don't think it will necessarily be a form of his treatments on all the films either. See what I mentioned above. I hope she does well but George Lucas is Star Wars. She's got to get the first one right in terms of bringing in the right people. For Disney to be happy with her, she'll also have to develop and succeed in the direction that Disney wants for TV, marketing, and merchandising. What Ernest is saying and what I'm saying is that Disney will eventually make their presence known. That's the nature of an acquisition. She works for them and they will set guidelines and goals and let her know what's expected of the company. George Lucas isn't running the show anymore. The future is not as easy to predict with him out of the picture for the most part.

Really we should just be thinking about how awesome is that we will have Lucas stories (but finally none of his uber control, bad directing and writing) mixed with Kathleen bringing in directing and writing talent for the treatments. Finally we may get something that is worshipped by generic folks AND longtime fans.

I hope we get something good too and I'm warming up to it more each day. With a Spielberg, Johnston, or even Abrams directing, and a return of Mark and a few others to the cast, I would get really excited for this.

I'm torn though. My view is actually inconsistent here. I'll admit that I dislike the majority of Lucas's changes on the SE's and I completely disagree with him on withholding the UOT. I greatly prefer the UOT. For me, the prequels failed to live up to the quality of the OT. They had some elements that I liked that I won't rehash again here. Overall, the only one that comes close for me is ROTS. On a purely technical level, I think it's better made than ROTJ. Jedi wins overall for me in the space battle and throne room scenes and because it contains the characters I cared about. However, and this may surprise some, I almost feel that Star Wars without George Lucas is Star Wars in name only. I haven't been able to wrap my brain around a Star Wars film without him being heavily involved. I'll come to eventually I guess.

[Ryan0503]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Of course. But when ESPN management makes bad decisions, the boot comes down. Disney is the Boot. Same thing with ABC. Of course they "operate as their own identity". I don't think most Americans know the revered "Monday Night Football" is owned by Disney. I don't think most Americans know "Shakespeare in Love" and "The English Patient" were Disney properties. Pretty sure that's how they'll handle things with LucasFilm. Disney isn't going to throw people from Lucas' organization out into the street. But they will consolidate eventually. Why wouldn't they? Why wouldn't you? Skywalker Ranch is prime studio space, but Disney doesn't need it to make Star Wars films.

Disney isn't making a Star Wars film ... Lucasfilm is .... just like Disney doesn't go out and televise College football ... ESPN does ... and Disney doesn't make marvel films ... Marvel Studios does... why would they spend a ton of money to fix something that isn't broken?? I doubt Disney will "relocate" Lucasfilm .... however that's my opinion, since none of us know exactly what Disney has planned for lucasfilm all we can do is speculate ... but from what I've seen in the past, Disney is very hands off when it comes to companies they own ... and they didn't buy lucasfilm only for Star Wars ... ILM is one of the most used special effects company in the world ... watch the credits of almost ANY SFX heavy movie and you'll see ILM listed ...

[The Edge]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

There is one thing about all this that disturbs me: a two year schedule for each new Star Wars film makes business sense, but it might be too intensive a schedule to produce real quality. Although technology has changed drastically since the original trilogy, they were produced on a three year schedule as was the prequel trilogy. These are complex films with huge sets (whether practical or virtual) and tons of special effects. Forcing them to release every two years might produce junk.

I agree. If each film were given 5 years at the maximum for development and production, I'm sure the quality will be greater. I mean, what's the rush? Star Wars will be around until the end of time, why not use the time to make something even more special than it was before?

[Scottie]

Ahahahaha

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by Ryan0503

Disney isn't making a Star Wars film ... Lucasfilm is .... just like Disney doesn't go out and televise College football ... ESPN does ... and Disney doesn't make marvel films ... Marvel Studios does... why would they spend a ton of money to fix something that isn't broken?? I doubt Disney will "relocate" Lucasfilm .... however that's my opinion, since none of us know exactly what Disney has planned for lucasfilm all we can do is speculate ... but from what I've seen in the past, Disney is very hands off when it comes to companies they own ... and they didn't buy lucasfilm only for Star Wars ... ILM is one of the most used special effects company in the world ... watch the credits of almost ANY SFX heavy movie and you'll see ILM listed ...

They're hands off until problems arise - see their acquisition of ABC, and all the heads that rolled when ABC went into the ratings toilet. That led to the rise of Bob Iger, as he was credited with righting the ship at ABC.

Point is, Disney will leave Lucasfilm alone, but if Disney is unhappy with their output, Disney will step in and make changes. Disney is a corporation, and like any other organism, government, or corporation on Earth, it operates out of self-interest. Things that make it stronger, they leave alone. Things that are hurting it, they remove. If Lucasfilm stumbles, Disney has the power to make changes to improve it from their point of view. There's nothing controversial or surprising about that. It's just the way things are, all over the world.

[Ryan0503]

Originally Posted by The Edge

I agree. If each film were given 5 years at the maximum for development and production, I'm sure the quality will be greater. I mean, what's the rush? Star Wars will be around until the end of time, why not use the time to make something even more special than it was before?

Iron Man 3 started filming last summer and comes out next May ... I think 2 years is plenty of time nowadays ... but I'd rather see the date pushed back if they need to instead of releasing what they have to meet a deadline

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by The Edge

I agree. If each film were given 5 years at the maximum for development and production, I'm sure the quality will be greater. I mean, what's the rush? Star Wars will be around until the end of time, why not use the time to make something even more special than it was before?

I'm not saying "more time" doesn't equal greater quality, but at the same time, it is no guarantee. Sometimes, great movies are made in very short order, because the idea and story are so strong, there's no reason to delay and futz around with it. Bambi took seven years to conceptualize and write and plan and ultimately produce and animate, but Dumbo took little more than a year. Both are great films in their own right, but one needed a whole lot more time to figure out, while the other was as clear as a lighthouse from the beginning.

I agree with the Pixar ethic -- don't produce anything until the story is locked. Great scripts make great movies.

Locking artists into release dates doesn't seem particularly helpful, but at the same time, without deadlines, some artists would dither and perfect endlessly, and so deadlines can be a good motivational tool. George Lucas once said, "Movies are never finished, they're abandoned." I understand what he's saying, but eventually you have to let the movie go and stop tinkering with it. Release dates help with that process.

[mrpink134]

Lets hope Disney doesn't do this to the OT

[JamesKurtovich]

^ lol @ stupid facial expression on Anakin

Seriously, how did George look at that and decide that was his "vision."

Here's hoping Sebastian Shaw reclaims his rightful place at Ben and Yoda's side.

[supersix4]

Originally Posted by JamesKurtovich

^ lol @ stupid facial expression on Anakin

Seriously, how did George look at that and decide that was his "vision."

Here's hoping Sebastian Shaw reclaims his rightful place at Ben and Yoda's side.

looks like the face Ben Roethlisberger makes in a public restroom.

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by JamesKurtovich

^ lol @ stupid facial expression on Anakin

Seriously, how did George look at that and decide that was his "vision."

Here's hoping Sebastian Shaw reclaims his rightful place at Ben and Yoda's side.

Well, Im not bothered by the switch like some are. I mean, the last time Vader was truly good, he was Anakins age. I get that his redemption occured as he was Shaws age but having Christainsen in this shot almost makes sense. You have a multi-generational group shot there. From youngest to oldest. Its not a huge deal, IMO.

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by supersix4

looks like the face Ben Roethlisberger makes in a public restroom.

LOL! I'll be sure not to show my wife that post, as she is from Pittsburgh and a big Steelers fan! Since I'm an Eagles fan with 0 Superbowls(3 NFL champoinships), I like to think I married into 6 Superbowls(3 more Stanley Cups, & 5 more World Series)....but I definitely liked your comment!

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

Well, Im not bothered by the switch like some are. I mean, the last time Vader was truly good, he was Anakins age. I get that his redemption occured as he was Shaws age but having Christainsen in this shot almost makes sense. You have a multi-generational group shot there. From youngest to oldest. Its not a huge deal, IMO.

Agree! I'm good either way.

[The Edge]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

Well, Im not bothered by the switch like some are. I mean, the last time Vader was truly good, he was Anakins age. I get that his redemption occured as he was Shaws age but having Christainsen in this shot almost makes sense. You have a multi-generational group shot there. From youngest to oldest. Its not a huge deal, IMO.

Amen, brother!

[Duffy12]

Originally Posted by EricJ

So, Marketsaw can make the exact same wishful blue-sky guesses we've been making ("Wow, Spielberg will direct, and Disney will make the UOT reappear from ashes!"), only they print it and now it's fact?

...Yyyyeah.
Even Disney doesn't know what they'll do with them yet--I don't think I'll create reality with the power of my mind, just yet.

You need to go back and re-read it more sloooooowly. And check out some of those links.

Apparently the guy has got an inside source and these reports start from three years ago.

.

[mrpink134]

Originally Posted by Duffy12

You need to go back and re-read it more sloooooowly. And check out some of those links.

Apparently the guy has got an inside source and these reports start from three years ago.

.

I agree, after reading it again, the inside source knows what he's talking about. I excited to see what happens next! UOT here it comes

[Col. Zombie]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

Well, Im not bothered by the switch like some are. I mean, the last time Vader was truly good, he was Anakins age. I get that his redemption occured as he was Shaws age but having Christainsen in this shot almost makes sense. You have a multi-generational group shot there. From youngest to oldest. Its not a huge deal, IMO.

Wrong. The last time Vader was good was when he fulfilled his destiny and tossed that evil emperor over the side of the railing. Plus, there was always good in him, and even Luke could sense it.

Now when Luke sees Anakin, Yoda, and Obi-Wan's ghosts he must have been thinking, "Who the ***k is that young guy? Oh wait, I guess that was my dad when he was younger?!"

C'mon. Lucas should have left Shaw in.

[mrpink134]

Originally Posted by Col. Zombie

Wrong. The last time Vader was good was when he fulfilled his destiny and tossed that evil emperor over the side of the railing. Plus, there was always good in him, and even Luke could sense it.

Now when Luke sees Anakin, Yoda, adn Obi-Wan's ghosts he must have been thinking, "Who the ***k is that young guy? Oh wait, I guess that was my dad when he was younger?!"

C'mon. Lucas should have left Shaw in.

+1000

Disney will fix the error

[Walts Ghost]

Originally Posted by Duffy12

.

From Marketsaw







http://marketsaw.blogspot.com/2012/1...-revealed.html


http://marketsaw.blogspot.ca/2009/10...p-another.html

.