Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Mon Sep 22, 2014 10:01 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 47 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
May 17, 2009: Re-making Star Wars? 
Author Message
Site Admin

Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 10:55 pm
Posts: 3151
Location: Mount Laurel, NJ, USA
Post May 17, 2009: Re-making Star Wars?
Click here to read topic.


Sun May 17, 2009 6:31 pm
Profile WWW
Gaffer

Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 9:21 pm
Posts: 29
Post Re: May 17, 2009: Re-making Star Wars?
First off, I started off my daughter (6 yr old) with EP4. When she is old enough for EP5 she can watch that then 1-3 and end with 6.
EP1-3 could have been much better. The EP4 and 5 films producer Gary Kurtz (and long time producer for early Lucas stuff) had a very long interview on IGN.com 7 years ago were his spills the guts on what happened between 5 and 6. How there was a backstory all set up and Lucas changed paths and went done the path we have all seen. And yes, he did say there was EP7-9, no matter how much Lucas said no, they did exist.

Most fans would think the Dark Empire comics or the Admiral Thrawn book series would make a good movie. For those who missed the comic, the emperor had cloned himself so to live forever. Good stuff. Either one works great and none of it had Lucas involved.

Also, I advise you watch the animated Clone wars series Cartoon Network has aired. Whiel the 'movie' wasn't all that the series got very good and had deep stories that got better animated as time went on. You can't really cut into the future live action w/o seeing all the animated TV shows. The writers involved and notch industry guys, not Lucas. He is more of an executive producer.


Sun May 17, 2009 9:38 pm
Profile
Gaffer

Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 9:21 pm
Posts: 29
Post Re: May 17, 2009: Re-making Star Wars?
If Lucas feels that he must tweak CGI, maybe he could tweak the boring Gungan-Droid fight scene in EP1. Then edit out Jar Jar. :)


Sun May 17, 2009 9:56 pm
Profile
Post Re: May 17, 2009: Re-making Star Wars?
FYI Star Wars wont be 25 in 2012, it will be 35 =]


Sun May 17, 2009 11:29 pm
Post Re: May 17, 2009: Re-making Star Wars?
Why don't they just remake / reboot the prequels again since they were so atrocious...

Just make sure you have Lucas bound and gagged so that JJ Abram can come in and rewrite the script 8-)


Sun May 17, 2009 11:38 pm
Post Re: May 17, 2009: Re-making Star Wars?
I would like to see the New Jedi Order fleshed out.


Mon May 18, 2009 12:30 am
Assistant Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:45 am
Posts: 72
Post Re: May 17, 2009: Re-making Star Wars?
James gave all three STAR WARS prequels ratings of 3.5 stars, but the fourth paragraph of this latest ReelThought conveys a less-than-enthusiastic opinion of them. Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but has the passage of time tempered his original takes?

For me, STAR WARS EPISODE III: REVENGE OF THE SITH is the piece de resistance of the six films. Sure, the audience knows how the story ends, but the journey is often better than the destination. The backstory is masterfully fleshed out, and Anakin Skywalker's fate is a tragedy of Shakespearean dimensions. I know that sounds like hyperbole, but my opinion of EPISODE III is unshaken even after having re-watched the entire series (in production order) about a year ago. REVENGE OF THE SITH is like putting in the final piece of a huge jigsaw puzzle that took 28 years to complete, and it fits beautifully.


Mon May 18, 2009 12:44 am
Profile
Assistant Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:45 am
Posts: 72
Post Re: May 17, 2009: Re-making Star Wars?
I agree that the average movie watcher (at least the ones I know) views films no more than a few years old. They get the latest releases on DVD, but won't pick up something made even ten years ago. One of the more frustrating situations I encounter in my circle of friends and acquaintances is their complete ignorance of supposedly popular older films. And I don't mean classics like GRAND HOTEL or SOME LIKE IT HOT. I know individuals several years younger than me who've barely heard of WAYNE'S WORLD. I'm amazed at how many people don't know anything about film or pop culture history. I guess it's a reflection of how few people truly know and understand history in general.

Not too long ago someone asked me what some of my favorite films were. The second title I mentioned was KRAMER VS. KRAMER which elicited a "huh?" from the three people I was with (all younger and born around 1982). Not that they disagreed; they had never heard of it. I mentioned Meryl Streep and Dustin Hoffman (who I presume they had heard of) and how it was one of the most well-acted and poignant dramas I've ever seen. I had their attention. But as soon as I said it won multiple Oscars in 1979 including Best Picture, their interest noticeably shut down. One of them actually scoffed at the idea they would ever watch something that ancient. Dealing with people who think the world began the day they were born is exasperating.


Mon May 18, 2009 1:11 am
Profile
Post Re: May 17, 2009: Re-making Star Wars?
I'm already sick of this remake trend. You're taking a famous piece of property and exploiting it with little creative ambition (at least for most of them). One reason why remakes for Batman, Bond, Star Trek, etc. have succeeded is because their respective franchises buried themselves with increasingly disappointing sequels. Since these franchises were on life support, the studios wanted inspiration and fresh blood to bring them back to prominence. But as I said, most remakes are just done for exploitation and little creative ambition. They're usually made for financial purposes instead of creative ones and end up uninspired (like Wolfgang Petersen's "Posideon").

No matter how hard writers and directors try, they usually just can't recreate the experience and wonder of the original film. You can dress a remake with fancy special effects and sets, but you can't recreate the magical feeling. Sure, some classic movies may have cheap effects or flat acting, but that has given them a certain charm. If you try to fix certain classics by remaking them with CGI and such, in essence you may hurt the charm that made these movies become classics.

But in defense of remakes, sometimes I'll take a remake over making unnecessary sequels to long-dormant franchises.


Mon May 18, 2009 1:32 am
Post Re: May 17, 2009: Re-making Star Wars?
Certain properties actually *encourage* remakes. As Berardinelli pointed out, the 007 franchise is always reinventing itself. As relatively solid as Daniel Craig's outings have been, I very much doubt he'll be the last actor to don the tuxedo.

Superhero movies are loved in certain iterations, but the comic book characters they are based on reveal their remake potential. Batman has become an archetype. A rich, orphaned playboy dresses up like a bat and fights crime in Gotham City. We've had three different film directors interpret that setup now, but there have been innumerable visions and versions in the realm of comic books in the same time period.

--

On the more conventional side of things, I think history will reveal that we're in an unusually high volume period for the remake. The CG revolution that began in the early 90's matured a decade later to the point that the economics made sense to dramatically boost the visual reality of the entire history of special effect films.

While the technology will surely continue to improve, it's a much more iterative and evolving process now. A decade later, does anyone see the seams in "The Matrix" special effects the same way we saw rubber suits and models hanging from wires in earlier films? I think they hold up extremely well. What more visual flair could a new version of the Lord of the Rings offer?

Beyond a dramatic leap forward like 3D holographic films (or how about Brave New World's "feelies"!) I hubristically offer that we're making pretty definitive versions of properties now. It's not that I don't think future remakes can and will occur. Just that they'll have to occur for legitimate story and cultural attitude updating rather than creatively easy updating of the visuals.

All a long-winded way to say that the pace of remakes will eventually slow.


Mon May 18, 2009 2:24 am
Post Re: May 17, 2009: Re-making Star Wars?
See this is where I disagree with Mr. berardinelli and many other critics.
Whats wrong with moving on?We change with time and have to simply keep up.
Star wars is eing re-released in 3D!
I mean most people dont even realize what that means...3D is the future of cinema...full stop.
The reason it hasnt got its dues is because the makers only emphasise on the 3D aspect all the while forgetting that a story also needs to be told...If everything goes hand in hand then I see no problem at all.
18th December 2009 will see the release of one of the most highly anticipated movies ever-James Cameron's AVATAR and trust me people-It will be the MOVIE of your lifetime-I am not confident,I am overconfident and thats because cameron apart from being a technical wizard is also a great storyteller with deep psychological aspects added in.In the hands of the right film-maker it will be great just as a great driver has a better control and understanding of what he is doing.
Star wars already has a base,a touching story and the visuals are fantastic.The 3D wont take anything away...It will just add something special to those awesome sequences and that should be worth the re-release I suppose.
You dazzle the old fans and enlighten the new ones with its rich history all the while enjoying every second of it


Mon May 18, 2009 2:25 am
Post Re: May 17, 2009: Re-making Star Wars?
Gene Roddenberry had always toyed around with the idea of a Star Trek prequel which took place in Starfleet Academy and focused on how Kirk and Spock met, so to me the new movie is just a fulfillment of Roddenberry's plan, and not a remake. Also,
[Reveal] Spoiler:
the new movie is the kicking off of a new franchise which uses the same characters, but not the events, as the timeline from the original series and films has been changed.
I would be OK with someone new coming in and doing episodes VII-IX, but Lucas is too much of a egomaniac to let that happen.

And yeah, 2012 will be 35 years since Star Wars was released. :)


Mon May 18, 2009 3:27 am
Post Re: May 17, 2009: Re-making Star Wars?
James! Please don't write articles like this one! Lucas might be reading and he MIGHT JUST DO IT. With Chewbacca as an ewok. You know, like it was supposed to be...

On an aside: I have to admit, I like remakes. You know exactly what you're getting, and there no need to pretend you're seeing something "worthwhile" (except for the Dark Knight, of course). And the great thing about reboots is that they close off the older movies/TV series, meaning that nobody will be going back and messing around with them any more.

Not to mention that as soon as a series reboots, you can turn to the nearest 9-year old and say "In my day, Star Trek was filmed with cardboard sets and spandex-wearing aliens, and we liked it!"

Or: "In my day, we watched Star Wars and we liked it!"


Mon May 18, 2009 6:49 am
Post Re: May 17, 2009: Re-making Star Wars?
iamed77 wrote:
James gave all three STAR WARS prequels ratings of 3.5 stars, but the fourth paragraph of this latest ReelThought conveys a less-than-enthusiastic opinion of them. Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but has the passage of time tempered his original takes?
I’ve been wondering the same. In think I brought the issue up in an old thread where we discussed where we respectfully but vehemently disagreed with his opinion. James has been dropping hints in his Reelthoughts possibly suggesting that his view of the prequels has changed for a while now. Of course, we both could be reading too much into potentially innocent comments...


Mon May 18, 2009 7:36 am
Post Re: May 17, 2009: Re-making Star Wars?
Great column today! Very, very funny too.

I'm not against a remake, per se, but it's certainly not the time just now. Let it stew a while longer.


Mon May 18, 2009 8:25 am
Post Re: May 17, 2009: Re-making Star Wars?
Funny how we're talking about "Star Wars" considering "The Phantom Menace" celebrates its 10th Anniversary on May 19th.


Mon May 18, 2009 11:15 am
Post Re: May 17, 2009: Re-making Star Wars?
I, for one, would like to read an outline of what JB discussed for a group of ninth graders.

What questions did they ask?

What topics appeared of most interest?

How did they select JB for a presenter??

My inquiring mind would like to know.


Mon May 18, 2009 12:40 pm
Post Re: May 17, 2009: Re-making Star Wars?
ck100 wrote:
Funny how we're talking about "Star Wars" considering "The Phantom Menace" celebrates its 10th Anniversary on May 19th.


I can't believe it's already been 10 years since Episode 1. For all its flaws (Jar Jar) it's still a good movie mainly because it's similar to the original trilogy in that it follows a small group of heroes throughout the movie. The prequels tended to get to bogged down with sub-plots which, in my opinion, removed the audiences ability to get as attached to characters as the original trilogy.

I have no problem with remakes/reboots per se, people just need to accept them for what they are and expect that all bets are off with them and that they may be drastically different from the originals. I say, leave the original trilogy as is and let's redo Episodes 1-3.
For the record here's how I rank the films:

Empire > Sith > A New Hope > Phantom Menace > Jedi > Clones


Mon May 18, 2009 12:54 pm
Post Re: May 17, 2009: Re-making Star Wars?
Well if everyone is giving loose change on the subject of remakes...

It's not even worth mentioning that remakes are all about money, as all big budget movies are greenlighted on the condition that they make a good return. The creativity of the writers/directors/etc is meaningless to the studio top dogs, just so long as their artistic vision has the sort of appeal that causes average hard working shmoes to part with their £/$!

To be honest, noone really knows how much of a remake was creative and how much was greed. The financial issue is a given, considering how the world works but the film makers themselves may never reveal their true intentions when it comes to their motivations. Star Trek gave me the impression that the minds behind it genuinly wanted to add something to the lore of the franchise. It seemed that carefully planned out and executed. However this doesn't really mean much in the world we live in... have studios learnt the lesson that even people's well meaning artistic vision can still be turned into a readly supply of blow and women? Of course they have!

My view is this; all reamakes are based on the generation of profit, however that doesn't mean that a genuinly creative mind has not pitched the idea out of appriciation of the subject matter. I'd gladly remake Operation Crossbow, a war movie I particularly like... but I'd have to convince a corrupted Hollywood assclown that I'd be able to continue his drug habit for a while to come.


Mon May 18, 2009 12:55 pm
Post Re: May 17, 2009: Re-making Star Wars?
Dragonbeard wrote:
Well if everyone is giving loose change on the subject of remakes...

It's not even worth mentioning that remakes are all about money, as all big budget movies are greenlighted on the condition that they make a good return. The creativity of the writers/directors/etc is meaningless to the studio top dogs, just so long as their artistic vision has the sort of appeal that causes average hard working shmoes to part with their £/$!

To be honest, noone really knows how much of a remake was creative and how much was greed. The financial issue is a given, considering how the world works but the film makers themselves may never reveal their true intentions when it comes to their motivations. Star Trek gave me the impression that the minds behind it genuinly wanted to add something to the lore of the franchise. It seemed that carefully planned out and executed. However this doesn't really mean much in the world we live in... have studios learnt the lesson that even people's well meaning artistic vision can still be turned into a readly supply of blow and women? Of course they have!

My view is this; all reamakes are based on the generation of profit, however that doesn't mean that a genuinly creative mind has not pitched the idea out of appriciation of the subject matter. I'd gladly remake Operation Crossbow, a war movie I particularly like... but I'd have to convince a corrupted Hollywood assclown that I'd be able to continue his drug habit for a while to come.


No matter what, a remake is being done for money. Of course this is a fact everyone knows. However, if a long-standing franchise has been bogged down by bad sequels, then you know the studio will want something fresh and inspired to keep it going. That's why new talent is hired to give a new spin on things. But it seems regularly the studio picks the name of a famous movie out of a hat and just pumps out a remake for the hell of it. I mean name-recognition means dollars, right? These kinds of remakes are the more uninspired ones and don't work so well creatively and/or commercially.


Mon May 18, 2009 1:37 pm
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 47 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


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