Brady Marino
Footballguy
If any Twilighters end up in the new Star Wars, I quit being a nerd altogether.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
STAR WARS: Episode 7 (All-Time #1 opening box office.) (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter BigSteelThrill
- Start date
Tom Servo
Nittany Beavers
Star Wars Christmas Special down?A musical number or two can't hurt either.'St. Louis Bob said:'Good said:I also think all of the sequels and spinoffs should be done entirely in CGI.
flysack
Footballguy
Tony Jabroni
Footballguy
Stay...on...TOPIC!Stay...on...TOPIC!
Good Posting Judge
Footballguy
Ugh, he must've had to pay extra for that act that shares a name with a step in preparing a course that comes before the main course.
Last edited by a moderator:
Insein
Footballguy
Nice
ScottNorwood
Footballcutie
How did Jabba get Leia into the metal bikini? I'd like to see that scene - in vivid detail
Charlie Steiner
Footballguy
Death sticks
Insein
Footballguy
Very carefully.
Leeroy Jenkins
Footballguy
Looks pretty solid that Ford is to portray Han Solo in episode 7.
BigSteelThrill
Footballguy
Ford has the staying power of a superior actor. But I think I would prefer a new Leia and a new Luke.
Tom Servo
Nittany Beavers
Not so fast my friend
"They're talking to us. George [Lucas] wanted to know whether we'd be interested. He did say that if we didn't want to do it, they wouldn't cast another actor in our parts – they would write us out. … I can tell you right away that we haven't signed any contracts. We're in the stage where they want us to go in and meet with Michael Arndt, who is the writer, and Kathleen Kennedy, who is going to run Lucasfilm. Both have had meetings set that were postponed — on their end, not mine. They're more busy than I am."
Leeroy Jenkins
Footballguy
I like his other quotes too:
I think Hamill/Luke should be in all 3 and he seems the most eager. Ford/Han I think is in the first one only and Han dies like Ford thought he should have previously. That way Ford gets paid, but isn't stuck in the franchise. I think it makes sense for the story and actor. Leia and Lando . . . I'm not sure about them.
Gr00vus
Footballguy
You don't want to see Carrie Fisher in the metal bikini again?
NewlyRetired
Footballguy
yeah I have been pimping this idea for a long time in this thread.Have Han get captured/killed in the first movie and allow Luke to lead the twins on a rescue/revenge mission. By the second movie, the twins become the major players. This could also easily limit Fisher's role, which I think needs to be there to bind, but does not need to be in depth or long.Hooking up with Lando and Chewy on the mission would be fine with me.
Black Box
Footballguy
NewlyRetired
Footballguy
what, you don't like fan fic erotica?
Last edited by a moderator:
Charlie Steiner
Footballguy
That's a completely different kind of trilogy. At least we'd learn why he was named Chewbacca.what, you don't like fan fic erotic?
Billy Bats
Footballguy
X infinity. It will never happen, but they need to listen to this man when he talks.
Leeroy Jenkins
Footballguy
I'm way behind in my Star Wars reading.
Psychopav
Help us, Joebi-Wan Brynobi, you're our only ho
Well done, NewlyRetired. Pat yourself on the back..you earned it.
Wyld Stallyns
Footballguy
Only when he eats a lot of avocado and broccoli.
Tom Servo
Nittany Beavers
You could conceivably write his character such that it leaves open the possibility of him working movies at his pleasure (e.g., being captured). Even if he "dies" he can always be used in flashback sequences.
2015: Episode VII. With all the original cast. Hopefully Harrison Ford is an Admiral of a huge star ship and leads the Republic fleet into battle. Ala Admiral Ackbar. Luke is an old Jedi Master, ala ObiWan, and is ready to hand off the trilogy to some young upstart. Leia is the leader of the Republic. 2018: Episode VIII. At this point I kinda hope the original cast is gone. Or in supporting roles. I think Thrawn and Mara Jade will probably be used, because theyre interesting villains. Thrawn is basically an Erwin Rommel. Not evil or sadistic, just happens to play for the wrong team. Then that team betrays him. Interesting character. Mara Jade is kind of cool, cuz you have the whole sith turns good love interest thing with the main character (note: not Luke.) Then you're gonna need another Sith. I guess a cloned Emperor isnt the worst thing in the world. That actor is REALLY good in that role. 2021: I just want to stress, that in this new trilogy, I highly doubt they'll take anything but the broadest strokes from the books. Think about it. If you had your chance to write a STAR WARS movie, would you copy some crappy old book? And I do mean crappy. Trust me. Im a life long Star Wars fan and have read probably half the #### they have on the store shelves. None of them deserve to be a movie. None of them.2024: I dunno.2027: 50th anniversary remake.2030: Empire Strikes Back remake2033: Return of the Jedi remake.Then throughout you're gonna see spin off trilogies. A young Han Solo trilogy. Choose wisely, cuz youre gonna want him to return for the Original Trilogy remakes. That's 6 movies you're casting this kid for.Boba Fett. Hope they get someone besides that Jango Fett guy. Nothing against him personally, just not a lead actor. Which leads me to another point: dont worry about continuity with the prequels. The general public wouldnt notice, and the fanboys hate the prequels anyway. Darth Vader movie. Theyd be insane to wait until 2027 to use Vader, the marque character of the franchise. Whoever said youre gonna see an Episode 3.5 is 100% correct. Also, expect him to have some sort of presence in the spin off Han Solo & Boba Fett movies.Old Republic. Will probably start off as a trilogy, and then if its popular, will grow into a saga with its own spin offs and tv shows or whatever. Thats really it. I think the Clone Wars has been beaten to death, so I doubt you'll see live action stuff about that. Course anything is possible.
Kool-Aid Larry
Footballguy
dude, by 2033 it'll be a documentary
Jedi Knight
Footballguy
Here's what I would like to see. Let them do their post-Endor movies, but I would also like Disney to develop a re-do of Star Wars on the small screen. They already have the network and infrastructure to do it. I would prefer it to be done the same way Battlestar Galactica was. More adult, character-driven.I would start it off with Yoda on Degobah with a youngling that was badly wounded, but rescued from Vader's assault on the temple. Yoda is tending to his wounds as best he can and the child asks, "How did it all begin? Why are their Sith?" Then the story of the Sith is told over many episodes. Show the lead-up to episode 1. Develop Darth Maul.Then cover the prequel re-do. One of the key mistakes made with the prequels was Jar-Jar. That character should have been a pirate/smuggler/sarcastic type individual and Lucas made him a cartoon character instead. This could be re-done to have that neutral person that adds sarcastic humor like Han did in the original trilogy.Show the back-stories of Han, Chewie, Lando, etc... Show the Spice Mines of Kessel. Show the training that the Jedi have to go through. Show the seven styles of Lightsaber fighting. Show why Chewie owes Han a life debt.So much can be done....
Thunderlips
Footballguy
Heir to the Empire is better than anything Lucas has written.'xlledx said:
Eh. A lot of it is just fuddling around. Not a very tight story. Like I said, some of the new villains are interesting, but Luke's cloned hand from Cloud City? I believe thats called "scraping the bottom of the barrel."
Thunderlips
Footballguy
That doesn't necessarily refute my statement though....unless Ewoks, two Death Stars, and a brother and a sister kissing twice is great writing.And the cloned hand was a bit of a nice homage to the old idea of The Clone Wars....back when the Clones were supposed to be the bad guys.
Insein
Footballguy
Better than midichlorians.
shader
Footballguy
Doesn't sound like you like star wars
Billy Bats
Footballguy
They're all the same guy, doesn't matter.'T Bell said:
Thunderlips
Footballguy
I got a love/hate with it.You were a kid in the late 70s/80s.....you're always going to think fondly of it. But.....1) I think he pissed away his franchise. He had all this time to do #### and he didn't. And he not only didn't do it....it's almost like he didn't do anything just to be a bit of a ####.2) When he finally got around to making the prequels, he really dropped the ball in a couple of ways. A) He took what could have been the most tragic character of all time and insisted that a mannequin play him. Christiansen was horrible. The idea of Vader being a kid in the first one was horrible. His decisions dampened the character. B) While I get that he says he made these prequels "for the kids"....I can't help but think that he really got caught with his pants down in regards to creating a story and movie franchise that could be engrossing to adults and kids. I think that the Harry Potter and LOTR franchises (both taking place at the same time) showed the limitations of the way he presented his story. 3) I don't care what he says....he didn't have all his #### mapped out. The Zahn books came out in the early/mid 90s (when he's supposed to be thinking about the prequels) and they specifically make references to Clones being bad and multiple Sith. There were a couple of other discrepancies in the books that...if they were "officially stamped with Lucas' approval" should have jibed more with what he claimed the storyline was going to be. 4) I'm not one who cares too much about the constant re-editing. The Jabba palace stuff....cheesy. I certainly don't mind the improved special effects or little add ons....but he did sully his two major characters by having Han shoot first and Luke scream as he jumped off the platform in Cloud City. I remember thinking the Luke was was WAY worse as (IMO) he changed it from a guy basically killing himself instead of submitting to the Dark Side to almost accidentally slipping and screaming as he went down.
joey
Footballguy
I love the way people think that just because it's practical effects, it makes it good effects. There are great effects and bad effects, whether they be digital or practical.Tangent. Sorry.
mad sweeney
Footballguy
The way actors react to their surroundings (or lack of) is heavily affected no matter how good or bad the effects are. The opening fight scene in the first abortion for example, where Long Duc Dong and Obi Wan just go through the motions and don't look like they're fighting anything, even though the quality of the effects was top notch.I love the way people think that just because it's practical effects, it makes it good effects. There are great effects and bad effects, whether they be digital or practical.Tangent. Sorry.
joey
Footballguy
Just because a movie uses extensive digital effects doesn't mean you can't surround actors with partial sets or props to make sure they interact with their environment in a believable way. I agree that a bunch of actors standing on a blank green screen and then told to make believe theyre fighting against something that isn't there probably isn't going to look very convincing. But put those actors on the same green screen with carefully choreographed stunt doubles who'll accurately stand in for the creatures they'll be replaced with so the actors have something to really act against, then the fact that the creatures are being made digitally is neither here nor there. It's the planning and execution of the effects that is key. Not whether they're digital or practical.The way actors react to their surroundings (or lack of) is heavily affected no matter how good or bad the effects are. The opening fight scene in the first abortion for example, where Long Duc Dong and Obi Wan just go through the motions and don't look like they're fighting anything, even though the quality of the effects was top notch.I love the way people think that just because it's practical effects, it makes it good effects. There are great effects and bad effects, whether they be digital or practical.Tangent. Sorry.
mad sweeney
Footballguy
I'm not saying anything opposite of what you're saying here.Just because a movie uses extensive digital effects doesn't mean you can't surround actors with partial sets or props to make sure they interact with their environment in a believable way. I agree that a bunch of actors standing on a blank green screen and then told to make believe theyre fighting against something that isn't there probably isn't going to look very convincing. But put those actors on the same green screen with carefully choreographed stunt doubles who'll accurately stand in for the creatures they'll be replaced with so the actors have something to really act against, then the fact that the creatures are being made digitally is neither here nor there. It's the planning and execution of the effects that is key. Not whether they're digital or practical.The way actors react to their surroundings (or lack of) is heavily affected no matter how good or bad the effects are. The opening fight scene in the first abortion for example, where Long Duc Dong and Obi Wan just go through the motions and don't look like they're fighting anything, even though the quality of the effects was top notch.I love the way people think that just because it's practical effects, it makes it good effects. There are great effects and bad effects, whether they be digital or practical.Tangent. Sorry.
joey
Footballguy
I'm saying that there's a whole lot of folks who paint "digital effects" to equal ”bad effects" and that's just not true. Pet peeve for me since I read those kind of comments all the time and it strikes close to home. Sorry for the hijack.I'm not saying anything opposite of what you're saying here.Just because a movie uses extensive digital effects doesn't mean you can't surround actors with partial sets or props to make sure they interact with their environment in a believable way. I agree that a bunch of actors standing on a blank green screen and then told to make believe theyre fighting against something that isn't there probably isn't going to look very convincing. But put those actors on the same green screen with carefully choreographed stunt doubles who'll accurately stand in for the creatures they'll be replaced with so the actors have something to really act against, then the fact that the creatures are being made digitally is neither here nor there. It's the planning and execution of the effects that is key. Not whether they're digital or practical.The way actors react to their surroundings (or lack of) is heavily affected no matter how good or bad the effects are. The opening fight scene in the first abortion for example, where Long Duc Dong and Obi Wan just go through the motions and don't look like they're fighting anything, even though the quality of the effects was top notch.I love the way people think that just because it's practical effects, it makes it good effects. There are great effects and bad effects, whether they be digital or practical.Tangent. Sorry.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
It's good to see news like this, but I can't remember the last time Ford was good in a movie - or even looked like he wanted to be in a movie. He really has become a grumpy old fart.
Similar threads
