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

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by JavaJulien

Apparently Lucas has washed his hands of the franchise so it shouldn't matter. If he legitimately gets sour grapes over someone doing a better job than he did, then that really is his own issues to deal with.

Agreed. SOMEBODY is going to drect Episode VII, and inevitably, people are going to have opinions on it. Besides, Lucas had four swings at the plate already, and people still call Kirschner's work superior, so he's been living with that annoyance for a while - like, for 30 years. And if he really cares about Star Wars moving forward and living on - man, who better...

Daring to hope. Probably won't happen. But daring to hope.

[aiman04]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Guys -- Spielberg just bowed out of two projects long in development (Robopocalypse and Interstellar) in the course of a week. Robo had commitments from Hathaway and Chris Hemsworth, and was supposed to lens in March. Interstellar is passing to Chris Nolan.

Hmmm...

Personally, I hope he's not ill. He's 67 after all. My other hope...is it possible? Is he going to helm Star Wars VII?

Not so fast, he's still gonna direct ROBOPOCALYPSE (or he's delaying it until 2015 so he can help his friend with that little space movie first).

'Robopocalypse' delay: Steven Spielberg vows it's not dead!

There’s still a little spark in those killer robots after all. Yesterday came the announcement that Steven Spielberg’s sinister sci-fi saga Robopocalypse, which he had planned to shoot this summer for a debut in April 2014, had been put on hold, with no details on when — or if — it might come back on the calendar. That seemed to be a clear indication that the film, based on Daniel H. Wilson’s 2011 novel about a machine uprising, was headed for oblivion. But now, the Lincoln filmmaker — who is celebrating a leading 12 Oscar nominations this morning for that movie — tells EW that Robopocalypse‘s demise has been greatly exaggerated.

Take heart, sci-fi fans: our mechanized extermination is still nigh. The movie was set to begin filming with a script by Cloverfield writer Drew Goddard, and Anne Hathaway and Thor‘s Chris Hemsworth planning to star. Spielberg says he’s just pumping the brakes — not turning the car around, and certainly not junking it. “We found that the film was costing a lot of money and I found a better way to tell the story more economically but also much more personally,” Spielberg said. “I found the personal way into Robopocalypse, and so I just told everybody to go find other jobs, I’m starting on a new script and we’ll have this movie back on its feet soon.” He said he’s not sure of the timeline for when they might shoot, let alone get it into theaters, but he estimated a delay of about six to eight months.

Spielberg was adamant that he wasn’t scratching Robopocalypse off his to-do list. “Not at all. I’m working on it as we speak,” he said.

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2013/01/10/robo...lberg-still-on/

[Member-115369]

Originally Posted by tilallr1

You are delusional to think Spielberg would touch this thing with a ten foot pole. George, I am sure, has told him all the horror stores of fanboy backlash by now.

Hell, Spielberg has saw that first hand with the backlash over Indy 4.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by aiman04

Not so fast, he's still gonna direct ROBOPOCALYPSE (or he's delaying it until 2015 so he can help his friend with that little space movie first).

'Robopocalypse' delay: Steven Spielberg vows it's not dead!

There’s still a little spark in those killer robots after all. Yesterday came the announcement that Steven Spielberg’s sinister sci-fi saga Robopocalypse, which he had planned to shoot this summer for a debut in April 2014, had been put on hold, with no details on when — or if — it might come back on the calendar. That seemed to be a clear indication that the film, based on Daniel H. Wilson’s 2011 novel about a machine uprising, was headed for oblivion. But now, the Lincoln filmmaker — who is celebrating a leading 12 Oscar nominations this morning for that movie — tells EW that Robopocalypse‘s demise has been greatly exaggerated.

Take heart, sci-fi fans: our mechanized extermination is still nigh. The movie was set to begin filming with a script by Cloverfield writer Drew Goddard, and Anne Hathaway and Thor‘s Chris Hemsworth planning to star. Spielberg says he’s just pumping the brakes — not turning the car around, and certainly not junking it. “We found that the film was costing a lot of money and I found a better way to tell the story more economically but also much more personally,” Spielberg said. “I found the personal way into Robopocalypse, and so I just told everybody to go find other jobs, I’m starting on a new script and we’ll have this movie back on its feet soon.” He said he’s not sure of the timeline for when they might shoot, let alone get it into theaters, but he estimated a delay of about six to eight months.

Spielberg was adamant that he wasn’t scratching Robopocalypse off his to-do list. “Not at all. I’m working on it as we speak,” he said.

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2013/01/10/robo...lberg-still-on/

Thanks for the heads up. But what's he doing for the next eight months? He just cleared his schedule, and TinTin 2 won't happen until Jackson's done with Hobbit 3.

[Buddy Ackerman]

Intersteller has been a discussion with Nolan for a while though, so it's not come out of nowhere. I imagine Spielberg would prefer to take his time on Robopocalypse and have a bit of a rest after Tintin/War Horse/Lincoln (he is, as you say, 67) than try and so a Star Wars film in 8 months.

Plus, there are three other things to consider - a) Spielberg has stated that he wouldn't do Star Wars. He was very clear on it, he wasn't being coy; b) he's previously said that doing a franchise film similar this (he was talking about Harry Potter and Spider-Man) don't interest him as it's like 'shooting fish in a barrel' and I imagine that would extend to Star Wars as well; c) Perhaps the most important point - would I put a Spielberg-directed Star Wars film in my Spielberg collection or my Star Wars one? Exactly. It's too complicated, ergo it can't happen

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Thanks for the heads up. But what's he doing for the next eight months? He just cleared his schedule, and TinTin 2 won't happen until Jackson's done with Hobbit 3.

Well probably getting ready for the Oscar whirlwind tour for Lincoln. Then after that, as I mentioned previously, overseeing all the many projects he is currently producing.
The man has come out and said he won't be directing Star Wars, and I take him at his word.

[tigertron]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Lucas has immense respect for Spielberg. Spielberg has already ghost-directed on the series. Who better to get the franchise off on a solid footing? Spielberg would be essentially working for Kathleen Kennedy, not George Lucas, and the two just won 12 Oscar noms this morning for Lincoln. Spielberg shingles at Disney now with DreamWorks. Kathleen shingles now at Disney with Lucasfilm. I don't know guys...I'm daring to hope this could happen. Maybe it's not a wise dare, but it's a whole lot more possible this afternoon than it was a week ago. Can you imagine how the hype would explode if it actually happened? I think we'd see a global film-fan freak out the likes of which we've never seen before. If Spielberg's available and he's on board with the script...daring to hope.

This, and Spielburg has already worked with Kennedy before in War of the Worlds, so I guess it really is 50/50 as to whether he'll take the gig or not. I'm hoping that he does, Star Wars needs an experienced director like Spielburg at the helm.

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by tigertron

This, and Spielburg has already worked with Kennedy before in War of the Worlds, so I guess it really is 50/50 as to whether he'll take the gig or not. I'm hoping that he does, Star Wars needs an experienced director like Spielburg at the helm.

It's not anywhere close to 50/50, maybe more like a 1% chance, if that.
The man has said he has no intention of directing the upcoming Star Wars film. Fact.

Believe me, I hope I'm wrong and he does direct, but I can only take him at his word.

[tigertron]

Originally Posted by rickah88

It's not anywhere close to 50/50, maybe more like a 1% chance, if that.
The man has said he has no intention of directing the upcoming Star Wars film. Fact.

Believe me, I hope I'm wrong and he does direct, but I can only take him at his word.

Yeah, but money talks.

[Shanderson88]

Originally Posted by tigertron

Yeah, but money talks.

I normally agree with this, but I am not so sure it applies with Spielberg. Doesn't seem like the type of dude who would sign on to direct something he otherwise would avoid just to cash a huge check.

[Buddy Ackerman]

Originally Posted by tigertron

Yeah, but money talks.

Not to Spielberg. He has more than enough money as it is. He's got absolutely no need to make a film simply for financial gain.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by Buddy Ackerman

Not to Spielberg. He has more than enough money as it is. He's got absolutely no need to make a film simply for financial gain.

Spielberg has a sort of one for one policy - or used to - he will most certainly go shooting fish in a barrell, if that means the studio will then back a project he is really interested in. He agreed to make Jurassic Park in order for Sid Sheinberg to back Schindler's List at Universal, and Sid told him he had to do Jurassic Park first. So Spielberg blew through Jurassic Park because he was worried the film would go over schedule, and instead, he was lucky enough to wrap it 10 days early because he didn't dwell on certain things. He told the actors he was going to try and do no more than five takes and if they didn't get it, they didn't get it, he wasn't go to wait to nail it. So they moved incredibly fast.

Also, he was very interested in directing Harry Potter, but ran into creative differences with JK Rowling, because Spielberg wanted to condense Book 1 and Book 2 into one movie. That was barrell shooting, also, ditto Lost World and War of the Worlds and Crystal Skull.

Spielberg mixes it up, makes crowd-pleasers so he can continue to make his personal projects. As for having "no need" to make money, maybe not personally, but professionally, of course he does. Like Walt, making money is a tool to achieve your personal ideas. Spielberg starts making a string of flops, it makes it that much harder for a studio to greenlight his next project. Spielberg never invests his own personal wealth into his work. He prides himself on that. But Lincoln was rejected at Warner Bros., which is why it was set-up at Disney when Spielberg came over with Disney as the new home for DreamWorks.

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

Geesh - after seeing all this dancing stuff and whatever, Im actually now more scared of Disney OVER-exposing Star Wars via products, marketing, promotions, Burger King toys, etc, etc. Please dont do that. Dont dumb it down and make it a "brand" or something.

I know that George milked the living shiat out of the toys and stuff way back when but thats different than variety shows, Christmas specials, Glee versions, appearances on The View, stuff like that.

Damnit....

It doesn't matter who the studio is. The name of the game today is to exploit the asset in every way imaginable. The studios (or content owners) will make every deal they can, no matter how absurd or lame, whether it's deals with fast food restaurants, characters on car floor mats and keychains, rides in amusement parks, etc. The overall size of the licensing business is larger than the size of the movie business.

We're in an age of very short theatrical windows and then release in almost every media at the same time. There are some studio executives who want to move to day and date release in all media, but I personally think this would kill the theatrical business and eventually kill all big budget movies. You know how you don't see too many big dramatic series (like E.R., The West Wing or LOST) or the TV networks anymore and instead we have singing contests, dance contests and fat-loss shows? That's because network viewing has declined since there are so many other viewing choices and alternatives to spend free time. If they kill theaters (which they're on their way to doing), the same thing will happen to theatrical budgets. Having said that, a guaranteed hit, like a Star Wars, will still get made. But just about everything else will get real small.

About the only thing you won't see in LOTR or Star Wars films is product placement, but if they could figure a way to get it in there (perhaps a real logo on a future fictional product in a Star Wars film (even though it's "a long time ago")), I'm sure they would.

Have you watched the beginnings of any movies lately? They tend to be releases from five or six different companies. If it's a big film, studios don't want to fund it completely themselves because the budgets are so large that one failure can kill a studio, so a conglomeration of companies actually share in these films. It always makes me laugh when half the trailer is a list of company names.

Carrie Fisher used to joke that every time she looked in the mirror, she owed George Lucas money. That was nothing compared to what we're going to see in the future. I can pretty much guarantee you that Disney bought Lucasfilm as much for the merchandising and amusement park exploitation opportunities than for the rights to make future movies (although you need those future movies to keep interest in the parks and merchandise.) We'll eventually see Star Wars Land at Disney World. And I wouldn't be surprised if we eventually see a new animated series geared towards younger kids than the recent animated series.

[JamesKurtovich]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Also, he was very interested in directing Harry Potter, but ran into creative differences with JK Rowling, because Spielberg wanted to condense Book 1 and Book 2 into one movie.

Kudos to her for not allowing him to shit on her story.

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by tigertron

Yeah, but money talks.

It does, and Mr. Spielberg has millions upon millions of little voices talking to him every day. Spielberg directing Star Wars isn't about money, not in the least.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by rickah88

It does, and Mr. Spielberg has millions upon millions of little voices talking to him every day. Spielberg directing Star Wars isn't about money, not in the least.

Unless Disney agreed to pony up for a pet project in return, like Universal with Schindler's. In a way, they already have, by producing Lincoln. Turned out nicely for everyone, it could have gone the way of Amistad (a film I respect by the way).

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by JamesKurtovich

Kudos to her for not allowing him to shit on her story.

I don't think he was pooping on her story, he was thinking as a story editor. Book 1 is essentially "Harry makes friends and discovers Voldemort can't put his hands on him". Book 2 is where the meat of the series lies.

[Buddy Ackerman]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Spielberg has a sort of one for one policy - or used to - he will most certainly go shooting fish in a barrell, if that means the studio will then back a project he is really interested in. He agreed to make Jurassic Park in order for Sid Sheinberg to back Schindler's List at Universal, and Sid told him he had to do Jurassic Park first. So Spielberg blew through Jurassic Park because he was worried the film would go over schedule, and instead, he was lucky enough to wrap it 10 days early because he didn't dwell on certain things. He told the actors he was going to try and do no more than five takes and if they didn't get it, they didn't get it, he wasn't go to wait to nail it. So they moved incredibly fast.

Also, he was very interested in directing Harry Potter, but ran into creative differences with JK Rowling, because Spielberg wanted to condense Book 1 and Book 2 into one movie. That was barrell shooting, also, ditto Lost World and War of the Worlds and Crystal Skull.

Spielberg mixes it up, makes crowd-pleasers so he can continue to make his personal projects. As for having "no need" to make money, maybe not personally, but professionally, of course he does. Like Walt, making money is a tool to achieve your personal ideas. Spielberg starts making a string of flops, it makes it that much harder for a studio to greenlight his next project. Spielberg never invests his own personal wealth into his work. He prides himself on that. But Lincoln was rejected at Warner Bros., which is why it was set-up at Disney when Spielberg came over with Disney as the new home for DreamWorks.

I'll give you The Lost World because that really was barrel-shooting (and I like that film) but that was pre-A.I. which I would count as this scenario as starting. That was when he announced that he was only doing films that interested him. And I can buy that every film he has made since has been a personal project to him, even the blockbusters. He's mentioned War of the Worlds as a favourite book of his for a few years - I remember him discussing it around The Lost World's release - and Indy 4 was Indy - he wasn't going to let anyone else direct that, even if it was a case of George twisting his arm to do it.

(With regards to Harry Potter, I can see my quote from Spielberg and your info being the same thing - combining the two books was obviously interesting to him, only being able to do the first book might have been the too-easy 'barrel' point for him, hence him walking)

I don't think there's kudos to be gained from doing Star Wars to help him jump onto another personal project. He has Lincoln now - a big enough hit commercially and looking to be the big Oscar winner. Spielberg is currently higher than he has been for years, at least in terms of being a viable director (not that he was ever in danger but Tintin and War Horse did fine, just not enough to make Spielberg the name he once was. And Indy 4 was Indy 4.). Star Wars is far too safe a bet. it fits right into the barrel-shooting category. No-one would see it as a Spielberg film, it would just be Star Wars. I can't buy him doing this just to get a surefire hit. It is a surefire hit. It doesn't need him to do it and he doesn't need it to keep him going, financially, creatively or reputation-wise.

EDIT: I can see your point about Disney. But, again, they don't need to use a Spielberg bargaining chip on Star Wars. It is already a hit. besides, the Jurassic Park/Schindler's List reasoning was at the time when Spielberg's last serious film was Always and his recent hit was Hook. I w=can see why Universal would be hesitant to let him do a black and white Holocaust film without getting a blockbuster out of it. He's in a different position now.

[blonde_devil]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Lucas has immense respect for Spielberg. Spielberg has already ghost-directed on the series. Who better to get the franchise off on a solid footing? Spielberg would be essentially working for Kathleen Kennedy, not George Lucas, and the two just won 12 Oscar noms this morning for Lincoln. Spielberg shingles at Disney now with DreamWorks. Kathleen shingles now at Disney with Lucasfilm. I don't know guys...I'm daring to hope this could happen. Maybe it's not a wise dare, but it's a whole lot more possible this afternoon than it was a week ago. Can you imagine how the hype would explode if it actually happened? I think we'd see a global film-fan freak out the likes of which we've never seen before. If Spielberg's available and he's on board with the script...daring to hope.

yeah, but it doesn't take much to ruin that. it has happend before over creative differences. people are friends and want to work together or people have worked together for years on things but they work on a project, get different ideas and never work together again. look at directors and composers - Jim Cameron and James Horner(worked together again but took a decade), Tim Burton and Danny Elfman. it happens.

[Spicoli]

I have an opinion about this (part of ) thread.

Their seems to be two camps, some that see it realistically, that Steven won't be directing any Star Wars and everyone else who just keeps posting some crazy justification on why he MIGHT

lol