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

[Clark Kent]

Give Spielberg a good script and he is a master behind the camera. I am not sure his skills lie in elevating subpar material above its station.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by Clark Kent

Give Spielberg a good script and he is a master behind the camera. I am not sure his skills lie in elevating subpar material above its station.

Good director + bad script = well shot bad movie. Stanley Kubrick couldn't have salvaged Episode II.

[srinivas1015]

Has anybody watched the latest South Park episode? Disney buying Star Wars was the main plot of the episode.

Forward to 9:54

South Park Barack Obama - YouTube

[legendarymatt92]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Jaws established Spielberg as a blockbuster filmmaker. After Close Encounters, Kael said Spielberg was the most talented director ever to seem at home with mass-market films. I don't think she ever really understood Spielberg, because she turned on him later down the line. Spielberg was so rattled over the box-office failure of Sugarland, he was very concerned he wouldn't be able to work again, and took JAWS because it reminded him of DUEL, and he was confident he could pull it off. No one was more relieved by the success of Jaws than Spielberg, because the success allowed him to make more movies. Spielberg is an artist, and he is also pragmatic. Box office means more work. He was able to branch out, especially after smashes like Raiders and E.T., but he takes his failures to heart. I think the financial and critical drubbing of Empire of the Sun hit him hard, and I think it shows in his safe choices (and some could argue shortcuts) in Always, Last Crusade, and Hook. I don't think he found himself again until Jurassic Park's action scenes, and the high-wire triumph of Schindler's List.

It was during production of Jaws that he almost gave up the whole directing gig - I remember reading a book entitled Easy Riders, Raging Bulls that had an interview with Richard Dreyfuss, who boarded a plan after shooting his last segments and found Spielberg sitting in the seat next to him. Knowing for a fact that Spielberg should have been on set, filming the climactic scene whereby the shark is eventually killed, he started up a conversation and asked him why he was on the plane. Spielberg, looking anxious, replied that he'd simply had enough -- amongst all the budgetary worries, the problems with the mechanical shark and the long production time, he'd come to the conclusion that it was going to bomb and lose a lot of money, and he didn't want to be around for the backlash that would inevitably come his way. It was the second assistant director who finished the filming of that film, and Spielberg only found out it had become a huge success when he was hiding in his home and received a phone call from a studio head. Kind of off topic, but I do love that story -- even great directors can have moments of complete and utter terror when it comes to the production of a film.

Originally Posted by Clark Kent

Give Spielberg a good script and he is a master behind the camera. I am not sure his skills lie in elevating subpar material above its station.

I'm not sure about that -- you should look at how many re-writes E.T. had. Everyone involved in that was convinced it wasn't good enough as a story and would completely bomb. Spielberg's direction overcome that.

[Ernest Rister]

No, it was the last shot of the film, and Spielberg heard the crew was going to grab him as a joke and throw him into the ocean after he wrapped. So instead, he left in secret, and let the 2nd unit director film the last shot (the explosion). And then Spielberg went into post-production, where the film was really made out of everything that was shot. The idea that Spielberg shot the film and then went and hid inside his home is prepostorous. He did say he had a massive panic attack after arriving at his hotel on the flight home. But he got past it and started on post-production and even some reshoots. Ben Gardner's head was reshot in Spielberg's swimming pool.

[legendarymatt92]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

No, it was the last shot of the film, and Spielberg heard the crew was going to crab him as a joke and throw him into the ocean. So he left and let the 2nd nit film the last shot. And then Spielberg went into post-production, where the film was really made out of everything that was shot. The idea that Spielberg shot the film and then went and hid inside his home is prepostorous. He did say he had a massive panic attack after arriving at his hotel on the flight home. But he got past it and started on post-production and even some reshoots. Ben Gardner's head was reshot in Spielberg's swimming pool.

Ah well, I was just repeating what I had read within that book. There's no denying that everyone involved - Spielberg especially - thought the movie was going to bomb, though; he's even stated that in interviews. From what I've read about his early career, he was a very shy individual, and I could see him very easily becoming anxious about his future had he been thinking that Jaws was going to lose a lot of money.

The bottom line is that Spielberg, the master that he is, won't be doing Star Wars and I'm happy about that. He's without a doubt one of the greatest film-makers that there has ever been, but he just wouldn't have been right for this stage of SW.

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Anderton's family fell apart when his son, Sean, was abducted. Anderton, a pre-crime investigator, is haunted with guilt, and turns to drugs. Then he is predicted to kill a man by Agatha, and he becomes obssessed with avoiding this fate (like Oedipus, and even loses his eyes like Oedipus). Reducing Minority Report down to "Tom Cruise obssessed over his kids" isn't numerically accurate, or a fair summation of the movie.

Well, whatever--It's all mushy soccer-parent stuff now that he's got kids. (And throw in the father-guilt of "Catch Me If You Can", while you're at it.)
00's-10's Spielberg would give "I am your father" a whole new meaning...

[mrpink134]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Good director + bad script = well shot bad movie. Stanley Kubrick couldn't have salvaged Episode II.

You forgot to add Episode 1

[blonde_devil]

Originally Posted by stvn1974

JJ Abrams has already ruined Star Trek (IMO) so why not let him see if he can ruin Star Wars more than Lucas already has.

Thank God I am not the only one who hates the new Trek direction. I say the last movie was bad and people look at me like I have 2 heads or something.

The problem I see with the new movie is simple - Lucas was done with Star Wars stories set after Jedi so he allowed a ton of books to be written and he calls them official. Disney can't just ignore them because it interferes with their movie plans. So how do you do a new movie if it isn't based on the books? Of course this is the studio that released direct to video sequels to classics like Dumbo and Cinderella so pissing off the fans is not a new thing for them. I can see an "alternate" universe idea forming where the books are one universe and the new movies are all different universe, much like Trek is doing. Bad idea in my mind but I can see that happening to keep the fans happy.

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Thanks, Rickah.

On another note, Bob Iger was at the World Premiere for LINCOLN, and was asked on the red carpet about Star Wars. "I'm working very hard on that." he said. Look for Disney to either wait out the 2020 expiration, or just start buying out those contracts. Obviously, the biggest hurdle is the Fox ownership of Episode IV. Going to be fun to watch this all play out.

I agree, it will be interesting to see this all play out...no doubt about it.
I'm thinking since Disney already pushed $2billion cash & $2billion in stock in the pot, so far...they are going to want a return ASAP. So since Fox, historically has charged ~8% to distribute Lucasfilm product in the past...let just say they want to "milk" Disney a bit(they are bigger competition), and they decide to play ball to the tune of 10%....heck 12%. Disney still pulls some nice coin.
You're talking about the 3 originals, the new 3D releases, and possibly another boxed set featuring all of the above. Just in time for 2015!
As you said, it should be interesting!

[BladeRunner2007]

My biggest concern is will John Williams return? Without him it's just not Star Wars.

[Beast]

They'll get someone to ape him most likely. Or maybe Randy Newman will rise to the occasion.

Mad TV: Randy Newman sings Star Wars - YouTube

[segagamer12]

Originally Posted by blonde_devil

Thank God I am not the only one who hates the new Trek direction. I say the last movie was bad and people look at me like I have 2 heads or something.

The problem I see with the new movie is simple - Lucas was done with Star Wars stories set after Jedi so he allowed a ton of books to be written and he calls them official. Disney can't just ignore them because it interferes with their movie plans. So how do you do a new movie if it isn't based on the books? Of course this is the studio that released direct to video sequels to classics like Dumbo and Cinderella so pissing off the fans is not a new thing for them. I can see an "alternate" universe idea forming where the books are one universe and the new movies are all different universe, much like Trek is doing. Bad idea in my mind but I can see that happening to keep the fans happy.

I think you are missing something, Lucas has never counted the expanded universe stuff as official cannon and has contradicted them several times so Disney will likely keep the same policy to keep things neat and tidy. The comic book universe is a different beast altogether and that could turn into a mess because there is the Marvel stuff, the Dark Horse stuff, and then the stuff based on the Movies and the stuff based on the Novels and then the original stuff, but the films have always existed in their own universe anyways.

I disagree entirely on Star Trek I thought it was a perfect way to tidy things up neatly and start over fresh. Sometimes that is what you have to do, just look at DC.

[Shanderson88]

Originally Posted by segagamer12

I think you are missing something, Lucas has never counted the expanded universe stuff as official cannon and has contradicted them several times so Disney will likely keep the same policy to keep things neat and tidy. The comic book universe is a different beast altogether and that could turn into a mess because there is the Marvel stuff, the Dark Horse stuff, and then the stuff based on the Movies and the stuff based on the Novels and then the original stuff, but the films have always existed in their own universe anyways.

I disagree entirely on Star Trek I thought it was a perfect way to tidy things up neatly and start over fresh. Sometimes that is what you have to do, just look at DC.

I absolutely loved the new Trek. I have probably watched that blu 8-10 times. Here's the thing though, I not only didn't care about Star Trek prior to that movie, I had not even watched a moment of anything Star Trek related since I was 7 or 8 years old. Absolutely no interest, I couldn't tell you anything about it besides famous people that played roles in it.

Therefore, I went into Abrams Trek as just a sci fi flick starting a new story, and I loved it.

[rickah88]

Yeah the original Star Trek TV show was so good, it didn't get popular until AFTER it was cancelled!

As for Star Wars, of course Disney can go in any direction they chose regardless of what books are already written. I'm Disney might grab from a few different books: a character here, a plot line there....why not? It would be quite simple "add" the books to the next 3 films, just be a creative line someone says in one of the films. Again, it will be an interesting 2½ years!

[legendarymatt92]

Originally Posted by Shanderson88

I absolutely loved the new Trek. I have probably watched that blu 8-10 times. Here's the thing though, I not only didn't care about Star Trek prior to that movie, I had not even watched a moment of anything Star Trek related since I was 7 or 8 years old. Absolutely no interest, I couldn't tell you anything about it besides famous people that played roles in it.

Therefore, I went into Abrams Trek as just a sci fi flick starting a new story, and I loved it.

But, for me, that definitely made the film better - had I had a lot of prior knowledge, I'd have probably picked the film apart and hated it because it didn't stick to what the TV show had done. Without that insight, I could sit back and watch it for what it was.

That's what the new Star Wars should be like; they should link it to the old series, but have a new sense of wonderment and whimsy that just belongs to this new trilogy. You don't want a re-hash of what made the originals brilliant - you want something new, something more. Well, at least I do, anyway!

[segagamer12]

Originally Posted by legendarymatt92

But, for me, that definitely made the film better - had I had a lot of prior knowledge, I'd have probably picked the film apart and hated it because it didn't stick to what the TV show had done. Without that insight, I could sit back and watch it for what it was.

That's what the new Star Wars should be like; they should link it to the old series, but have a new sense of wonderment and whimsy that just belongs to this new trilogy. You don't want a re-hash of what made the originals brilliant - you want something new, something more. Well, at least I do, anyway!

You didn't have to go into the new Trek with that mentality to enjoy it, my parents are both major trek fans, and they loved it. My sisters who all hate Star Trek even liked it. I am not a trekkie by any means but I had plenty of knowledge going in, watched most of the tv shows and all of the movies and I thought it was perfect, they finally erased all that mess of a backstory that was getting overly complicated. The only trek fans who didn't like it are the uber nerds who hate change.

[Beast]

But it didn't erase the backstory. It just established an alternate timeline. The original continuity still exists. Which is good.

[Clark Kent]

The new Star Trek is a good movie, it's just not a good Star Trek movie. As a summer actioner, it's a first-rate movie. It bears almost no resemblance to anything in the original series or The Next Generation.

[Beast]

Originally Posted by Clark Kent

The new Star Trek is a good movie, it's just not a good Star Trek movie. As a summer actioner, it's a first-rate movie. It bears almost no resemblance to anything in the original series or The Next Generation.

I wouldn't entirely agree with that. Of course it doesn't exactly resemble the TV Shows. Neither did most of the theatrical films before. Because what works in a weekly TV Show doesn't really work in a Motion Picture. It still captured the feel of Star Trek, it just updated it for a new generation.

Plus it managed to make Kirk not only a likeable character but also a decent character. Which it deserves major props for.