Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Fri Aug 01, 2014 3:37 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 165 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Star Wars: Episode VII. (Not speculation. And not kidding.) 
Author Message
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:21 pm
Posts: 568
Location: Milwaukee, WI (USA)
Post Re: Star Wars: Episode VII. (Not speculation. And not kidding.)
Take it for what it's worth, but here's an interesting entry. See the "Conception" section.

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/History_ ... rs#History


Mon Nov 26, 2012 11:41 pm
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 10:09 pm
Posts: 1230
Post Re: Star Wars: Episode VII. (Not speculation. And not kidding.)
Ken wrote:
Star Wars
The Empire Strikes Back
Return of the Jedi
The Phantom Menace
Attack of the Clones
Revenge of the Sith

All the titles under which they were originally released. I guess people could make a case for "Episode I", but why would they?

So changing the name of a film - even in these cases, i.e. for the sake of continuity - bothers you THAT much? Wow. :?

Quote:
As for Raiders of the Lost Ark, at least they didn't alter the title within the movie itself; just on the box art.

Well, the titles of both "Empire" and "Jedi" WERE in fact "Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back" and "Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi" within their respective movies originally; it never said just "The Empire Strikes Back" or "Return of the Jedi." :P


Tue Nov 27, 2012 12:10 am
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: Star Wars: Episode VII. (Not speculation. And not kidding.)
Since when is a stated preference the same thing as being bothered by something? I'm much more concerned with alterations to the movies themselves and the notion of the alterations in principle, which do bother me a great deal.

And really, now, we're all aware that the numbering scheme has been in place in the opening crawls since Empire, but that's not the issue here. If you've been referring to it as "Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back" since 1980, that's fine. But I haven't, I know absolutely nobody who has, and I don't recall any promotional material prior to The Phantom Menace junket that did. Therefore, the proper title--as determined by usage--is "The Empire Strikes Back" and the number is basically a technicality or an afterthought or what-have-you.

_________________
The temptation is to like what you should like--not what you do like... another temptation is to come up with an interesting reason for liking it that may not actually be the reason you like it.


Tue Nov 27, 2012 2:38 am
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:04 am
Posts: 2388
Location: Lancashire, England.
Post Re: Star Wars: Episode VII. (Not speculation. And not kidding.)
"Episoode V: The Empire Strikes Back" sound mighty silly IMO.

_________________
... because I'm a wild animal


Tue Nov 27, 2012 5:30 am
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 10:09 pm
Posts: 1230
Post Re: Star Wars: Episode VII. (Not speculation. And not kidding.)
Ken wrote:
Since when is a stated preference the same thing as being bothered by something? I'm much more concerned with alterations to the movies themselves and the notion of the alterations in principle, which do bother me a great deal.

OK, maybe 'bother' wasn't the best word choice. Still, your sentiment regarding the titles strikes me as a bit, for lack of a better term, fundamentalist. :| Again, I don't have that many problems with the majority of the changes Lucas has made to the original films, especially not all the little technical tweaks. I'm sorry people fell so head-over-heels in love with 3 movies that were regarded in their maker's mind as slightly compromised visions (due to the technology - or lack thereof, for him - of the time). I mean, what if Ridley Scott had just said 'Fuck it' about the original studio-imposed cuts of "Blade Runner" and "Kingdom of Heaven" and never revisited them? Still, I kinda wish Lucas had made all these alterations in one go rather than finding something else to tinker with on every subsequent re-release. I have a perfectionist streak myself, but I'd like to think I'd know when to draw the line. :?


Wed Nov 28, 2012 8:59 am
Profile
Post Re: Star Wars: Episode VII. (Not speculation. And not kidding.)
H.I. McDonough wrote:
I have a perfectionist streak myself, but I'd like to think I'd know when to draw the line. :?


Well my problem with many of the alterations (similar to Spielberg's CGI - E.T.) is the disrespect of the original model makers, puppeteers, pyrotechnicians, camera operators and actors (Hayden Christensen copy/paste "ghost") etc.
I imagine someone tweaking and perfecting their craft and being proud of it because it ended up in a very sucessful movie. Then you have it replaced forever by CGI or whatever - and even worse: the versions with your original work aren't available anymore and just exist in rapidly decaying old vhs tapes.
"Oh that lame explosion which took us five month - let's replace it with CGI!" That is the only issue I have: lack of respect for people's achievement.
Why not replacing parts of the John Willams score with some hot new rock/pop act? Han Solo needs guitar shredding!

I think a director's cut restoring what got lost because of studio meddling is one thing. But going back because the technology wasn't available???? Why did Kubrick never replace the "Stargate" sequence with CGI? Because he got it right the first time! IMHO perfectionsim is thinking forward: doing it better in the next movie.

EDIT: this is my opinion: I think the best way is checking out what technology is available and work around it. Having an idea and forcing existing technology to make it become reality is not the correct way - unless one has the skills to push the envelope and come up with better solutions. For me the best directors are the ones who can have a firm grip on people to get things done - but who also know when to step aside and not get into the way of people who are really good at what they do. Control freaks will eventually run out of ideas and they will have trouble getting someone to help, because they won't have room to breathe working for a control freak. It needs maturity to draw the line between organizing tightly and neatly and accepting fresh input and give it credit. I think Lucas did have that more balanced approach at some time, probably when he had enough success and credit - but his ego was still somehow not too bloated.

I sincerely hope someone with a balanced approach and with a vision will direct the next "Star Wars" movie.


Wed Nov 28, 2012 10:23 am
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:21 pm
Posts: 568
Location: Milwaukee, WI (USA)
Post Re: Star Wars: Episode VII. (Not speculation. And not kidding.)
Threeperf35 wrote:
Why not replacing parts of the John Willams score with some hot new rock/pop act? Han Solo needs guitar shredding!


Replacing the "tribal Ewok song" at the end of Return of the Jedi with the New Agey mood track was a step in the right direction, but both pieces are still rather throwaway. Wasn't the music changed in Jabba's palace too? Though not part of the original score, per se...did Williams have a hand in either of them?


Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:26 am
Profile
Cinematographer

Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 6:19 pm
Posts: 603
Post Re: Star Wars: Episode VII. (Not speculation. And not kidding.)
I have never been bothered by the changes - truthfully, I wouldn't even notice that they were made except for reading about them online. I can understand Lucas being irked by a few details and wanting to change them, but honestly don't understand why he bothered to given the limited scope. Also like the newer episodes for the most part and am looking forward to what comes next. For some reason I'm not affected by the nostalgia of Star Wars. Star Trek is a different story - I never moved past the original crew. Never seen any of TNG, DS9, or other related shows or movies. I don't care that they exist, just never been interested in watching them.


Wed Nov 28, 2012 12:01 pm
Profile
Post Re: Star Wars: Episode VII. (Not speculation. And not kidding.)
Johnny Larue wrote:
Threeperf35 wrote:
Why not replacing parts of the John Willams score with some hot new rock/pop act? Han Solo needs guitar shredding!


Replacing the "tribal Ewok song" at the end of Return of the Jedi with the New Agey mood track was a step in the right direction, but both pieces are still rather throwaway. Wasn't the music changed in Jabba's palace too? Though not part of the original score, per se...did Williams have a hand in either of them?


Yes you are right. The Ewok song has been replaced. Not sure about Jabba's place. I only have the late 90s versions on DVD. I will try and google it. As far as I know John Williams wrote everything in the originals. Just guesswork: I guess he didn't write the changes. But I will check first. I somehow consider the instrumental which the band in the "cantine" in the original "Star Wars" (1977) to be part of the score (and it remains unchanged as we speak) since it is very melodic and somehow dovetails neatly into all other themes. I remember a cheezy "disco" version of the Star wars Themes, and the "cantine" tune was part of it - that's how recognizeable and smoothly fitting it is. The songs in "Return" are somwhat more disconnected from the dramatic score. I will check on information.

EDIT:

at Jabba's place the "Max Rebo Band" indeed plays a new tune in the 1997 re-edition. The new tune was written by Jerry Hey. Here is the Wikipedia entry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jedi_Rocks

The new tune for the Ewok celebratrion was a new composition by John Williams. I guess he did it, because the first version had lyrics by his son Joseph (FYI: on and off - and current - lead vocalist for the prog rock group Toto). makes sense:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ewok_Celebration


Wed Nov 28, 2012 12:25 pm
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: Star Wars: Episode VII. (Not speculation. And not kidding.)
Removing the voiceover from Blade Runner was unquestionably an improvement. It wasn't supposed to be there in the first place and the change was made over the heads of the original crew.

The changes made to Star Wars are more akin to adding the voiceover in the first place than the later removal of it. At best, the Special Edition "improvements" are jarring. They sever the connection between viewer and movie. At worst, they cause unnecessary problems with the material, such as altering the characterization of Han Solo.

_________________
The temptation is to like what you should like--not what you do like... another temptation is to come up with an interesting reason for liking it that may not actually be the reason you like it.


Wed Nov 28, 2012 1:59 pm
Profile
Post Re: Star Wars: Episode VII. (Not speculation. And not kidding.)
Ken wrote:
Removing the voiceover from Blade Runner was unquestionably an improvement. It wasn't supposed to be there in the first place and the change was made over the heads of the original crew.

The changes made to Star Wars are more akin to adding the voiceover in the first place than the later removal of it. At best, the Special Edition "improvements" are jarring. They sever the connection between viewer and movie. At worst, they cause unnecessary problems with the material, such as altering the characterization of Han Solo.


Agreed 100%. When I did the research on the new tunes, I came across a very comprehensive list of changes made to the original trilogy. I knew it was easy.

If the George Lucas quotes are correct, he is losing credibility fast.
Two points as an example:
1) Lucas changed (!) his statement about Han Solo: "He was never supposed to shoot first". That is B.S. Everyone knew that Han Solo shot first - and I thought it was cool since he shot an "annoying" alien. Since when does PC apply to ficticious aliens? And yes: it changes Han Solo's character arc for the worse.
2) He claimed he was only able to make about 25-30% of his vision. That's definitely nonsense. So he had a totally clear vision already at a young age? Why so many changes to the script then? Didn't any member of the large and talented creative team bring anything more to the table than just help turning a pre-existing vision into 25-30% reality? And most of all: didn't he ever expand and improve on his "vision" as he grew older and supposedly more experienced and with a much larger reference pool? If the quote is accurate: it's obvious that Lucas just thinks he had a vision.

Let's get someone less annoying please.


Wed Nov 28, 2012 5:06 pm
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3373
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Star Wars: Episode VII. (Not speculation. And not kidding.)
Threeperf35 wrote:
Ken wrote:
Removing the voiceover from Blade Runner was unquestionably an improvement. It wasn't supposed to be there in the first place and the change was made over the heads of the original crew.

The changes made to Star Wars are more akin to adding the voiceover in the first place than the later removal of it. At best, the Special Edition "improvements" are jarring. They sever the connection between viewer and movie. At worst, they cause unnecessary problems with the material, such as altering the characterization of Han Solo.


Agreed 100%. When I did the research on the new tunes, I came across a very comprehensive list of changes made to the original trilogy. I knew it was easy.

If the George Lucas quotes are correct, he is losing credibility fast.
Two points as an example:
1) Lucas changed (!) his statement about Han Solo: "He was never supposed to shoot first". That is B.S. Everyone knew that Han Solo shot first - and I thought it was cool since he shot an "annoying" alien. Since when does PC apply to ficticious aliens? And yes: it changes Han Solo's character arc for the worse.
2) He claimed he was only able to make about 25-30% of his vision. That's definitely nonsense. So he had a totally clear vision already at a young age? Why so many changes to the script then? Didn't any member of the large and talented creative team bring anything more to the table than just help turning a pre-existing vision into 25-30% reality? And most of all: didn't he ever expand and improve on his "vision" as he grew older and supposedly more experienced and with a much larger reference pool? If the quote is accurate: it's obvious that Lucas just thinks he had a vision.

Let's get someone less annoying please.
I don't really have an issue with any of that stuff. Like JB I say since he owns the films, he can change them however he wants, even if I might not necessarily agree with the changes, though to be honest I can barely tell the difference between the "old" and "new" versions without a side-by-side comparison.


Wed Nov 28, 2012 5:42 pm
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: Star Wars: Episode VII. (Not speculation. And not kidding.)
I'm not saying that he shouldn't be able to make changes. He has a right to make changes and I have a right to express my opinion about their merit.

I am not a Lucas basher by any means. He contributed significantly to my childhood, which in turn contributed to the person I am today. I haven't lost appreciation for that fact. That said, not only do I believe that the special editions are inferior, I am tremendously unhappy as a person-who-likes-Star Wars that he would attempt to suppress the movies I grew up with in favor of whichever endlessly tinkered versions are currently available.

As for his comments about his vision, I don't know or really care whether they're true or not, nor do I care to speculate about his reasons for making them. I can understand him not really being happy with how the first film came out, given the hard time he had while making it, but he was still able to forge a powerful connection with his audience. I think that's more important.

_________________
The temptation is to like what you should like--not what you do like... another temptation is to come up with an interesting reason for liking it that may not actually be the reason you like it.


Wed Nov 28, 2012 5:58 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3373
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Star Wars: Episode VII. (Not speculation. And not kidding.)
Ken wrote:
I'm not saying that he shouldn't be able to make changes. He has a right to make changes and I have a right to express my opinion about their merit.

I am not a Lucas basher by any means. He contributed significantly to my childhood, which in turn contributed to the person I am today. I haven't lost appreciation for that fact. That said, not only do I believe that the special editions are inferior, I am tremendously unhappy as a person-who-likes-Star Wars that he would attempt to suppress the movies I grew up with in favor of whichever endlessly tinkered versions are currently available.

As for his comments about his vision, I don't know or really care whether they're true or not, nor do I care to speculate about his reasons for making them. I can understand him not really being happy with how the first film came out, given the hard time he had while making it, but he was still able to forge a powerful connection with his audience. I think that's more important.

I can understand that, I myself didn't see the original trilogy until around the time that Attack Of The Clones came out, so I never quite developed the attachment to the OT that most people did, the older versions of the filmss were shown on my local public TV stations and the newer versions I checked out from the library, so for me they kinda blurred together and I don't really prefer one version over the other.


Wed Nov 28, 2012 6:22 pm
Profile
Director

Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:44 pm
Posts: 1446
Post Re: Star Wars: Episode VII. (Not speculation. And not kidding.)
Quote:
People that I would consider for the film-making decisions for the new films:

Producer - J.J. Abrams, Spielberg, Peter Jackson, Gary Kurtz, Michael Bay
Director - Joss Whedon, J.J. Abrams, Spielberg
Writers - Joss Whedon, Roberto Orci, J.J. Abrams, Gary Kurtz, Alex Kurtzman


I guess Kathleen Kennedy agrees with you:

Quote:
J.J. Abrams will direct the next "Star Wars" film for Disney, taking stewardship of one of Hollywood's most iconic and lucrative film franchises, an individual with knowledge of the production told TheWrap.

Lucasfilm Chief Kathleen Kennedy has been courting Abrams, one of the most successful directors and producers in Hollywood -- and a man beloved by fanboys.


http://www.thewrap.com/movies/article/j ... sive-74596


Thu Jan 24, 2013 7:15 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 8:35 am
Posts: 423
Post Re: Star Wars: Episode VII. (Not speculation. And not kidding.)
J.J. Abrams directing both Star Trek and Star Wars is downright weird.


Thu Jan 24, 2013 7:22 pm
Profile
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 9:17 pm
Posts: 529
Post Re: Star Wars: Episode VII. (Not speculation. And not kidding.)
Awkward Beard Man wrote:
J.J. Abrams directing both Star Trek and Star Wars is downright weird.


I agree. I feel like it goes against the laws of nature.

What's more confusing is how J.J. Abrams scored this gig. I'm uncomfortable with the monopoly this man has over science fiction. Is it time for the supreme court to weigh in yet? This has to break some anti-trust law.


Thu Jan 24, 2013 8:50 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 8:35 am
Posts: 423
Post Re: Star Wars: Episode VII. (Not speculation. And not kidding.)
Well in interviews for the first Star Trek movie, Abrams always said he was more of a Start Wars fan than a Trek fan, and I think his sensibilities are more suited to the franchise. I just wish he'd quit it with the freakin' "mystery box" approach to storytelling!


Thu Jan 24, 2013 8:55 pm
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 10:09 pm
Posts: 1230
Post Re: Star Wars: Episode VII. (Not speculation. And not kidding.)
darthyoshi wrote:
Awkward Beard Man wrote:
J.J. Abrams directing both Star Trek and Star Wars is downright weird.


I agree. I feel like it goes against the laws of nature.

What's more confusing is how J.J. Abrams scored this gig. I'm uncomfortable with the monopoly this man has over science fiction. Is it time for the supreme court to weigh in yet? This has to break some anti-trust law.

Again, Star Wars is technically FANTASY (albeit with prominent sci-fi elements), so let's not give him TOO much credit. But, yes, it does seem weird that he's now helming the 2 biggest fanboy franchises.


Fri Jan 25, 2013 1:00 am
Profile
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 9:17 pm
Posts: 529
Post Re: Star Wars: Episode VII. (Not speculation. And not kidding.)
H.I. McDonough wrote:
Again, Star Wars is technically FANTASY (albeit with prominent sci-fi elements), so let's not give him TOO much credit. But, yes, it does seem weird that he's now helming the 2 biggest fanboy franchises.


Psh, call it what you will. This is like finding out the VW Beetle and the Porsche 911, cars popular for completely different reasons, were designed by the same person.

Oh wait.


Fri Jan 25, 2013 3:24 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 165 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot], Google [Bot] and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forum/DivisionCore.
Translated by Xaphos © 2007, 2008, 2009 phpBB.fr