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

[Nailwraps]

Originally Posted by R3P0

Or Maybe they will cut a deal with Fox to leave everything as is you never know. Disney isnt stupid when it comes to distribution and product they know you have to spend money to make money. They will already make a ton off toys and theme park attractions as well as sales, so if they take a small hit on keeping things as the status quo with fox logos, fanfare and all its a small price to pay for the good of the product.

IE Disney Logo
then Lucasfilm logo
Then Fox Logo/Fanfare
Star Wars Crawl

Guys just relax and see what Disney does, your not going to spend 4.5 billion dollars to tank the product or the royalties they got from this.

I hope you're right. Incidentally, it should be the Disney logo, THEN the Fox logo (with fanfare), then the Lucasfilm logo, then the crawl.

[blonde_devil]

Originally Posted by tilallr1

You're mistaken sir. Star Trek Insurrection & Nemesis, DS9 & Voyager did that all by themselves.

If anything he brought the franchise back into the black and opened it up to a much wider audience. Which is a commendable feat.

I would take his comments with a grain of salt. One minute he is actually saying he would love the opportunity to direct Star Wars movies, now he is saying he isn't interested. Sounds suspicious. Like they already choose another director and now he is bitter.

just because it was successful doesn't mean it was good. he may have made it accessable for a wider audience but he did it by dumbing it down, adding cheap jokes and leaving huge plotholes in it. what he did is the equivalent of turning ER into General Hospital. but that is an arguement for a different thread.

i don't know if any "big" name director should be shooting this. i mean, the easy way is to say it is an action movie and just hire Michael Bay but do we want that? Lucas wasn't exactly a known name when he made it, maybe they need to look down that path for a director.

[R3P0]

Originally Posted by Elandyll

Or to advertise for a competing company once you fully own something.

Again, save for ep IV, do not expect to see the Fox fanfare after 2020 on the Star Wars OT and PT.

As for the -new- Star Wars episodes, if you think you are going to see the Fox logo at the beginning, you are simply delusional (unless Fox managed to implement something in the distribution contract, but given that Lucasfilm owned 100% of the rights (besides IV), I don't see how.

Corporations that compete work together all the time look at the recent deals between Honda and Ford on Engine technology. Its not like tossing the Fox logo on there is going to damage the reputation of Disney or cost them any irreparable harm by divulging any trade secrets. Its a logo to keep the flow of the franchise going which is what Disney will want to make a profit off the toys, video sales, rereleases, and tourist attractions.

The basic rule of business is spend money to make money if Disney came forward and said well give you .25 per ticket per showing to toss the logo and fanfare on the new releases to keep the continuity you think Fox wont hesitate to license the logo and fanfare for that you are delusional. Both companies make hand over fist and the fans are happy because the continuity is still there.

[Ernest Rister]

Disney co-produced DRAGONSLAYER and POPEYE with Paramount, trying to minimize their exposure if either tanked. Neither began with a Buena Vista title card ("Walt Disney Pictures" didn't exist then, nor Touchstone).

[Elandyll]

Originally Posted by R3P0

Corporations that compete work together all the time look at the recent deals between Honda and Ford on Engine technology. Its not like tossing the Fox logo on there is going to damage the reputation of Disney or cost them any irreparable harm by divulging any trade secrets. Its a logo to keep the flow of the franchise going which is what Disney will want to make a profit off the toys, video sales, rereleases, and tourist attractions.

The basic rule of business is spend money to make money if Disney came forward and said well give you .25 per ticket per showing to toss the logo and fanfare on the new releases to keep the continuity you think Fox wont hesitate to license the logo and fanfare for that you are delusional. Both companies make hand over fist and the fans are happy because the continuity is still there.

Yep, you are delusional.

Disney has no interest whatsoever in putting the Fox logo in there, aside to please a few die hard fans who can't let go of their intro logo.

The -only- case you would see the Fox logo on the new episodes (or the others past 2020) would be if Disney needed to co-finance the films, like MGM did with Sony on the new Bonds.

Do you seriously see that happening? (rhetorical question, at this point I see you are not really dealing in reality).

The reality is in order of probability imo:

1 - We will only see the Lucasfilm logo at the beginning (with possibly a microscopic mention right under it saying "A Walt Disney Company"). Touchstone pictures and/ or Walt Disney Studio will appear at the end of the end credit roll.
2 - We will start with the Touchstone logo, then followed by the Lucasfilm logo
3 - Something completely new
4 - Something crazy (like the Disney castle in the intro - this is not gonna happen for anything remotely "mature" like eps V, VI, II and III have been in parts)
5 -...
6 - In order to secure the distrib rights of ep IV from Fox they agree to put Fox's logo on every movie, even when Fox has nothing to do with it
7 - Disney needs to co-finance the New Star Wars trilogy with Fox and thus put their logo alongside theirs
8 - ...
9 - ...
10 - Disney thinks that to please a few dozens fans across the world they should put the Fox logo anyway, even though Fox has nothing to do with the franchise anymore (save ep IV)



P.S: The logo discussion is idiotic anyway, don't know how I got sucked into it to start with. Why would anyone even care?

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by blonde_devil

i don't know if any "big" name director should be shooting this. i mean, the easy way is to say it is an action movie and just hire Michael Bay but do we want that? Lucas wasn't exactly a known name when he made it, maybe they need to look down that path for a director.

I dont think a big-name director should touch it. I feel the way Willy Wonka felt when he handed the company reigns to Charlie and he said: "An adult would want to do everything their way". Same thing applies here in a sense: A veteran, established director might want to push their own agenda, use their ideas, stray too far off course, be hard to work with, etc, etc.

Getting a young, fresh director will probably make the film more neutral in style or closer to the OT. Think about it - the OT was directed mainly by unknowns at the time and it worked out great.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

I dont think a big-name director should touch it. I feel the way Willy Wonka felt when he handed the company reigns to Charlie and he said: "An adult would want to do everything their way". Same thing applies here in a sense: A veteran, established director might want to push their own agenda, use their ideas, stray too far off course, be hard to work with, etc, etc.

Getting a young, fresh director will probably make the film more neutral in style or closer to the OT. Think about it - the OT was directed mainly by unknowns at the time and it worked out great.

They were industry vets and industry pros, they just weren't "auteurs" who cared more about their voice than they cared about the story. You need a director who is a pro, a vet, and isn't an "auteur", and can adapt his or her style to the style of the franchise. That's why Quentin Tarantino's statement was so laughable...Lucasfilm never had any intention of asking him to direct in the first place.

This is why Frank Marshall, Joe Johnston, Brad Bird, and Martin Campbell are all solid choices. We'll see what happens.

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by tilallr1

I can only think of 2 reasons he would be doing this:

(1) He had an early visit from the ghosts of Christmas past, present and future.

or

(2) He is dying.

Going by historical precedent, Jim Henson first sold the Muppets to Disney in '90 because of (1)--after he realized he'd thrown his core industry down the toilet chasing after his bigger corporate goal that didn't work out--and had no idea that (2) would be happening so soon.

So both valid reasons, but 2 is the stuff of fan tabloids. George's definitely slowing down, and he no longer wants the fan hassle, but he'd have to start missing a few key public appearances, like Steve Jobs did.

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

They were industry vets and industry pros, they just weren't "auteurs" who cared more about their voice than they cared about the story. You need a director who is a pro, a vet, and isn't an "auteur", and can adapt his or her style to the style of the franchise. That's why Quentin Tarantino's statement was so laughable...Lucasfilm never had any intention of asking him to direct in the first place.

This is why Frank Marshall, Joe Johnston, Brad Bird, and Martin Campbell are all solid choices. We'll see what happens.

Makes sense. Quentin Tarantino? Go away already...time to make some teenager-enhanced tough guy movie or revenge porn, isnt it?

Those other guys would probably be fine.

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

Makes sense. Quentin Tarantino? Go away already...time to make some teenager-enhanced tough guy movie or revenge porn, isnt it?

And stick another 70's blaxploitation homage right in the middle of it, just because it occurred to you that day of shooting?

Originally Posted by s2mikey

I dont think a big-name director should touch it. I feel the way Willy Wonka felt when he handed the company reigns to Charlie and he said: "An adult would want to do everything their way". Same thing applies here in a sense: A veteran, established director might want to push their own agenda, use their ideas, stray too far off course, be hard to work with, etc, etc.

That's a good metaphor: Again, it wasn't like he narrowed down hundreds of choices of directors to settle on Irvin Kirschner for Empire, or Ron Howard for Willow, or Charles Martin Smith (late of American Graffiti) for Radioland Murders.
He wanted personal in-cronies who knew his style, and wouldn't stray too far from collaborating with the executive producer and the established style.

Give a Lucas film to just anybody, and you get Red Tails.
They've got a writer who's steeped in fan-lore tradition, think they'll be similarly looking for directors who'll swear loyalty oaths.

Originally Posted by tilallr1

Disney's Star Wars Episode VII - Opening Crawl - YouTube

(Okay, was anyone else just waiting for the fan-snipey Disney joke to drop the other shoe, and that the "Pirate Lords" would turn out to be the two feared pirates wanted by the Alliance, Jaxpa Ro and Kapp Tenhuk? )

[R3P0]

Originally Posted by Elandyll

Yep, you are delusional.

Disney has no interest whatsoever in putting the Fox logo in there, aside to please a few die hard fans who can't let go of their intro logo.

The -only- case you would see the Fox logo on the new episodes (or the others past 2020) would be if Disney needed to co-finance the films, like MGM did with Sony on the new Bonds.

Do you seriously see that happening? (rhetorical question, at this point I see you are not really dealing in reality).

The reality is in order of probability imo:

1 - We will only see the Lucasfilm logo at the beginning (with possibly a microscopic mention right under it saying "A Walt Disney Company"). Touchstone pictures and/ or Walt Disney Studio will appear at the end of the end credit roll.
2 - We will start with the Touchstone logo, then followed by the Lucasfilm logo
3 - Something completely new
4 - Something crazy (like the Disney castle in the intro - this is not gonna happen for anything remotely "mature" like eps V, VI, II and III have been in parts)
5 -...
6 - In order to secure the distrib rights of ep IV from Fox they agree to put Fox's logo on every movie, even when Fox has nothing to do with it
7 - Disney needs to co-finance the New Star Wars trilogy with Fox and thus put their logo alongside theirs
8 - ...
9 - ...
10 - Disney thinks that to please a few dozens fans across the world they should put the Fox logo anyway, even though Fox has nothing to do with the franchise anymore (save ep IV)



P.S: The logo discussion is idiotic anyway, don't know how I got sucked into it to start with. Why would anyone even care?

Ok first off forgive me I thought forums were a place for logical and intelligent discussion, then again I guess I have to remember the crowd around here sometimes, you Star Wars fanboys deal in the absolute. If you cannot disprove a statement you retort which is what you did here by assuming you know what I think.

I simply provided logical solutions as to how to keep the originals in tact and provide continuity between what now will be all 9 films. If you ever took a basic business course, you would know that companies do things together all the time for the betterment of the product. Do I think Disney needs help with distribution no, it is obvious they don't based off the marketing and distribution of such small films they have recently released like the Avengers and Toy Story 3.

Its a logical what if scenario discussion forgive me for getting involved. Now if you would like to continue a logical discussion with out the insinuating tones please by all means lets have a discussion on your 1-10 list because yes no one knows what Disney will do but it is fun to have these discussions and look back in 2015 when we see whats up, and be like wow guess I did guess right.

IDK about you but on slow days at work like today for me this type of discussion is an outlet something to do, that's how i got sucked into it and probably you as well.

I got no beef with you man, but honestly its a discussion no need to be condescending.

[binarymelon]

Originally Posted by tilallr1

I wonder about this, because it was a cash cow and worth at least 30 billion.

Any actual numbers around that valuation? Lucasfilm has only generated $6.5 billion in gross revenues. After you adjust for inflation, take out your costs (theatre cut, distribution costs, marketing, budgets), series tied up with other studios (Indy) and add your assets, I would say 4 sounds plenty fair.

[Strevlac]

Originally Posted by EricJ

The Fox fanfare. It's been there since the days of Cinemascope.

I am quite aware of the Fox fanfare. I just wanted to know what Lucasfilm fanfare he is talking about, because there is no Lucasfilm fanfare.

[legendarymatt92]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

They were industry vets and industry pros, they just weren't "auteurs" who cared more about their voice than they cared about the story. You need a director who is a pro, a vet, and isn't an "auteur", and can adapt his or her style to the style of the franchise. That's why Quentin Tarantino's statement was so laughable...Lucasfilm never had any intention of asking him to direct in the first place.

This is why Frank Marshall, Joe Johnston, Brad Bird, and Martin Campbell are all solid choices. We'll see what happens.

Not necessarily -- it doesn't need to be a vetern or pro, because that is exactly what Lucas wasn't when he made the first film. Tarantino was never a choice because he doesn't have the style needed to make a Star Wars film, not because he's an "auteur" - and that's a very debatable term to use anyway, because which directors are true auteurs and which are simply craftsmen who make great films?
Personally, I'd like to see some fresh blood on this; a director with a little experience but who isn't well known amongst a wide audience. As well as allowing a new, fan-based approach to it, it'd definitely allow more of a gateway for aspiring film-makers to get into the industry.

And where did Martin Campbell's name come from?

Originally Posted by tilallr1

Has anyone really asked why Lucas sold his entire empire to Disney?

I wonder about this, because it was a cash cow and worth at least 30 billion. So for Lucas to sell everything for only 4 billion seems highly suspect. Then he donates most of it to charity. Another odd thing for a really rich guy to do.

I can only think of 2 reasons he would be doing this:

(1) He had an early visit from the ghosts of Christmas past, present and future.

or

(2) He is dying.

Could you imagine the media furore if Lucas had not donated most of it to charity? A billionaire who makes another $4 billion and keeps it to himself whilst there are children starving in Africa? He'd have been in the headlines for weeks and it would have completely ruined his public image (although some Star Wars fan might argue that he has already!). I honestly don't think that he is dying -- well, I hope he isn't -- and I can understand why he has done what he did from his point of view without being terminally ill; he knows that Star Wars will outlive him in whatever form, even if he held the rights until his death, and he knows that Star Wars fans want more from such a beloved series.

And that $30 billion is completely unsubstantiated. There's no way the company was ever worth that much - hell, Disney's probably only worth about $40 billion now.

[Ryan0503]

Originally Posted by Strevlac

I am quite aware of the Fox fanfare. I just wanted to know what Lucasfilm fanfare he is talking about, because there is no Lucasfilm fanfare.

Pretty sure he was speaking of the lucasfilm logo that plays right after the fox

[Nailwraps]

There is no Lucasfilm fanfare. The Fox Star Wars films begin with a short version of the Fox logo and then Lucasfilm bwith the Fox fanfare playing over them.

Also, we made the 100 page mark!

[tilallr1]

Originally Posted by binarymelon

Any actual numbers around that valuation? Lucasfilm has only generated $6.5 billion in gross revenues. After you adjust for inflation, take out your costs (theatre cut, distribution costs, marketing, budgets), series tied up with other studios (Indy) and add your assets, I would say 4 sounds plenty fair.

I read it in an article, which I can't find at present, asking the same questions. But, lets be honest the Star Wars property alone is going to fetch Disney 4 billion inside of about 5 years. New trilogy, or maybe 2. New toys, amusement parks, merchandising!!! I think its safe to say Star Wars is at least worth double what he got for all of Lucasfilm. Especially if the films are made to a much wider audience, unlike the prequels.

This doesn't include what they might do with Indiana Jones and the potential revenue for Skywalker Sound, ILM, and Lucas Arts.

Now your telling me that the sum of those companies, which Lucas sold, plus the potential value of Star Wars / Indy alone isn't worth A LOT more than 4 billion? Your crazy. I agree 30 billion may be high, but I don't think its that off the mark. I would have said 15 billion myself broken down this way. Star Wars = 8 billion, Indy = 2 billion, rest of company 5 billion. It's not always about how much they are worth now, but the potential value, when your selling.

Disney is about to become the most powerful studio in Hollywood. Scratch that, they now are the most powerful studio in Hollywood. In my opinion, they just made a hell of deal.

I know for a fact that Lucas isn't a idiot. So whether he did it because he is dying or he is just plain generous, something smells fishy.

[Beast]

For one, Indiana Jones wasn't included in the estimated value of Lucasfilm. Due to a variety of factors.

It's not like $4B is a small amount of money. Especially when half of it is coming from stock.

Lets not forget that he also has made a vast fortune, half of which he'd already given away... off of Star Wars and the numerous other things he's been involved in over the years. So seeing Star Wars with a good home is probably more important than the price.

We also don't know all the particulars of the deal. Since Lucasfilm is remaining an independent entity and isn't moving from Skywalker Ranch. But Lucas maintains ownership of the Ranch. So he's likely getting a monthly check for all the property rental as well.

Plus we know he's likely going to get paid for his continued work as a consultant with the property. And so on.

[Elandyll]

Originally Posted by R3P0

Ok first off forgive me I thought forums were a place for logical and intelligent discussion, then again I guess I have to remember the crowd around here sometimes, you Star Wars fanboys deal in the absolute. If you cannot disprove a statement you retort which is what you did here by assuming you know what I think.

I simply provided logical solutions as to how to keep the originals in tact and provide continuity between what now will be all 9 films. If you ever took a basic business course, you would know that companies do things together all the time for the betterment of the product. Do I think Disney needs help with distribution no, it is obvious they don't based off the marketing and distribution of such small films they have recently released like the Avengers and Toy Story 3.

Its a logical what if scenario discussion forgive me for getting involved. Now if you would like to continue a logical discussion with out the insinuating tones please by all means lets have a discussion on your 1-10 list because yes no one knows what Disney will do but it is fun to have these discussions and look back in 2015 when we see whats up, and be like wow guess I did guess right.

IDK about you but on slow days at work like today for me this type of discussion is an outlet something to do, that's how i got sucked into it and probably you as well.

I got no beef with you man, but honestly its a discussion no need to be condescending.

That's the thing. Besides the two scenarios I evaluated (Disney and Fox making a deal for ep IV distribution and Disney deciding to co-finance the new Star Wars trilogy), which are both far far cry, you haven't given 1 logical reason why Disney should keep the Fox logo.
But I'm all ear.

[Clark Kent]

The rumors about the timing of the sale by Lucas:

The current CEO of Lucasfilm was pushing for another Star Wars film and Lucas himself simply didn't want to go through the ringer again of producing more Star Wars movies. He did want the brand and franchise to exist well after his death and he believed Disney was the best steward going forward for Star Wars.

Lucas could have gotten more money in an open bidding process, most analysts think the price was a very good deal for the Mouse House. But he wanted a company he thought he could trust with the brand more than the absolute dollar amount.

As for selling right now, many think it is not a coincidence he sold before the tax rates are going to be raised on the highest income earners in 2013.