Disney aquires Lucasfilm, LTD. - Star Wars Episode VII coming in 2015

[Ithekro]

Superman only stopped showing up in the theaters for a time, yet he was still all over the TV from Lois & Clark, the various cartoon series since the 1990s and Smallville.

The Clone Wars film didn't do as well as expected because the main grouping of fans and critics didn't want it to be a children's movie. It was. In fact it was basically just the first story arc of the TV series made into a movie to act as a pilot of sorts. The TV series has been doing well and is almost finished with its fifth season.

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

Superman only stopped showing up in the theaters for a time, yet he was still all over the TV from Lois & Clark, the various cartoon series since the 1990s and Smallville.

The Clone Wars film didn't do as well as expected because the main grouping of fans and critics didn't want it to be a children's movie. It was. In fact it was basically just the first story arc of the TV series made into a movie to act as a pilot of sorts. The TV series has been doing well and is almost finished with its fifth season.

The key thing is that stopped appearing in film. Likewise, Star Wars will keep appearing elsewhere, but it might be finished(at least in the short term) on film.

Consider the case of Disney itself. For a while Disney Animated films were bankeable hits, but they brought a succession of mediocre and bad films, and eventually the ceased production entirely. Recently they've gotten "back in the game", but they're not as successful as they once were, and they might be giving up on 2d animation in favour of CGI.

I just think they should be careful. If Disney doesn't ensure the first few films are real hits, they'll be dealing Star Wars a blow to it's long term success.

[JagdPanther]

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

I don't think Superman is a good example. Superman III and IV were so bad that they practically killed the Superman franchise on film, and not even the recent 2006 film was able to revive it.

I don't think bad films could ever kill "Star Wars" as a whole, but it could certainly kill the franchise at the Box Office.

Star Wars is already on shaky ground, with mixed feelings about the prequels, and the Clone Wars film being a moderate success.

If they mess up too many times, Star Wars won't stay the guaranteed money maker it is right now.

This is my concern, too. I'd rather they just focus on the Sequel Trilogy. Don't waste time and effort on pet projects.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by JagdPanther

This is my concern, too. I'd rather they just focus on the Sequel Trilogy. Don't waste time and effort on pet projects.

But realistically, how many characters in the Starwars universe who was NOT in a film, managed to become famous outside the fandom?

All well and good that you want to keep things the way they are, but Disney wants to branch out. They want to create more superstars from the Star Wars world. And the only way is to give them their own movies.

I mean, there was a time when many people didn't know who Tony Stark was. Hell, I didn't know Tony's name, only know his suit, until the movie came out.

[james0246]

Originally Posted by JagdPanther

This is my concern, too. I'd rather they just focus on the Sequel Trilogy. Don't waste time and effort on pet projects.

Like most (all) animation companies Disney has separate studios for separate projects. The first part of the new trilogy will take precedence over everything...currently at least, but once that hurdle has been surmounted, then the studio will start expanding outward into new and different (and hopefully interesting) territories.

There seems to be this weird idea floating around the Disney is a profit-oriented company that just happens to make a quality product. No, they are a profit-oriented company that realizes the consumers want a quality product (quality doesn't have to mean great, merely competent and diverting). Disney has amazing market research and knows how to tailor their products for both the largest audience possible (the Marvel universe so far), while also targeting specific niche markets (many of their television shows and their countless DVD-only releases). Star Wars can fit in with all portions of Disney's marketplace. You'll get your nerdier R-13 films, your more simplistic but still fun action/adventure pieces (ala Pirates), a few types of cartoons, and even a Disney Princess are two (god I would love to see a Star Wars film or animation where a female character is the actual hero (and not a fake hero where countless men have to protect her)). And that's not to mention the video games, books, online content, etc. There will be content we don't like (for sure), but over all I expect some damn fine entertainment over the next decade or more.

[RRW]

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movie...QswyBTJ08PE.99
Han Solo and Boba Fett movie

[Endless Soul]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

But realistically, how many characters in the Starwars universe who was NOT in a film, managed to become famous outside the fandom?

The very first name that popped into my mind was Mara Jade.

Endless "Emperor's Hand" Soul

[Ithekro]

Well women like Mara Jade and Jaina Solo would fit that "woman that doesn't needs countless men to protect her" catagory. They can even give Sith Lords problems more than Leia Organa, who, depending on her writer, can give them problems as well (depending on how much Jedi training the writer decides she has at the time).

All know their way around a lightsaber.

Jaina Solo is the rumored star for the next trilogy, but that is very rumor mill fan speculation. She does cover most of Luke and Anakin's points. Jedi in training. Lightsaber skills. Ace Pilot (she's in freaking Rogue Squadron in some arcs). Love problems (two suitors). Family issues...Her parents are Galactic Heroes (targets for several dozens different orginizations) and her uncle is the Grand Master of the Jedi Order....plus her brothers.... And if I guess right, could eventually be considered a "Disney Princess" (Daughter of the Princesss of Alderaan, Granddaughter of a Queen of Naboo. Possibly Empress of the Empire...though I don't know if that was ever confirmed.)

[james0246]

^Somehow I doubt Disney will be able to easily cover the Yuuzhan Vong War (let alone the full extent of the Twins storyline).

That being said, my money is on Cade Skywalker. It's a return to form storyline (similar in size and scope to the original trilogy) with enough "edge" for a modern audience while allowing the past exploits (specifically Luke) to reappear.

[ArchmageXin]

Originally Posted by james0246

Like most (all) animation companies Disney has separate studios for separate projects. The first part of the new trilogy will take precedence over everything...currently at least, but once that hurdle has been surmounted, then the studio will start expanding outward into new and different (and hopefully interesting) territories.

There seems to be this weird idea floating around the Disney is a profit-oriented company that just happens to make a quality product. No, they are a profit-oriented company that realizes the consumers want a quality product (quality doesn't have to mean great, merely competent and diverting). Disney has amazing market research and knows how to tailor their products for both the largest audience possible (the Marvel universe so far), while also targeting specific niche markets (many of their television shows and their countless DVD-only releases). Star Wars can fit in with all portions of Disney's marketplace. You'll get your nerdier R-13 films, your more simplistic but still fun action/adventure pieces (ala Pirates), a few types of cartoons, and even a Disney Princess are two (god I would love to see a Star Wars film or animation where a female character is the actual hero (and not a fake hero where countless men have to protect her)). And that's not to mention the video games, books, online content, etc. There will be content we don't like (for sure), but over all I expect some damn fine entertainment over the next decade or more.

Just to be fair, Leia came from another era in the 70s. Women are expected to be saved back then. Go look at some of the early Bond girls who couldn't press a button to save her life, vs the modern bond girls who can carry and shoot.

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

All well and good that you want to keep things the way they are, but Disney wants to branch out. They want to create more superstars from the Star Wars world. And the only way is to give them their own movies.

If they want to branch out, sure that's fine, but it won't count for anything if what they produce is no good. With the Star Wars franchise being in a delicate state at the moment, and also in a period of transition to new management, they need to tread lightly. Announcing a new Trilogy is bold enough, announcing spin-offs I feel might be overplaying their hand. With so many projects announced they're just diluting their focus. They should instead focus on producing 1 good film first(that fits into a good trilogy plan), and then proceed from there.

And if they want to make more scifi, why does it have to be Star Wars? Couldn't these new Sci-Fi be something new? Of course maybe they're afraid of having another bomb like John Carter. But John Carter didn't bomb because it wasn't based on a popular franchise, it bombed because it wasn't a good film, and it was badly marketed. And if they make a film of John Carter quality unrelated to another franchise, then at least the damage is limited. If they make a bad Star Wars film, that harms the Star Wars brand.

The Star Wars brand in video games has already been harmed enough that Star Wars video games are now no longer guaranteed successes (though it does enhance an already good game), I'd hate to see the same thing happen in movies, and that seems like a guaranteed eventuality if:
a) they make bad movies
b) they over-saturate the market with Star Wars. People can eventually be "Star Warsed out" .

I'm not against Disney trying to exploit Star Wars at a commercial property (that's been going on since 1977!), but if they're going to make movies I want them to live up to the potential the setting provides. I want more "Empire Strikes Back" and less "Phantom Menace", or worse "The Ewok Adventure" or "Star Wars Christmas Special".

[Ithekro]

Sometimes it could be considered that they held back for too long.

The Holiday Special did give us two very important things:
1. A first look at Boba Fett.
2. A lowest mark to not be exceeded.

[JagdPanther]

Originally Posted by james0246

^Somehow I doubt Disney will be able to easily cover the Yuuzhan Vong War (let alone the full extent of the Twins storyline).

That being said, my money is on Cade Skywalker. It's a return to form storyline (similar in size and scope to the original trilogy) with enough "edge" for a modern audience while allowing the past exploits (specifically Luke) to reappear.

I want the EU protected, generally, but... I would not be sad to see the Yuuzhan Vong trampled and overwritten.

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

I'm not against Disney trying to exploit Star Wars at a commercial property (that's been going on since 1977!), but if they're going to make movies I want them to live up to the potential the setting provides. I want more "Empire Strikes Back" and less "Phantom Menace", or worse "The Ewok Adventure" or "Star Wars Christmas Special".

I find your lack of faith disturbing.....



...which mirrors how I feel too Can't say I was too thrilled about the news of the spin-offs.... guess we'll just have to wait and see.

[Ithekro]

The suggested source of the Han Solo movie is a novel written quite some time ago. "Han Solo at Star's End". Written in 1979.

[Endless Soul]

I still have that book somewhere, also Splinter of the Mind's Eye.

Endless "Full library" Soul

[james0246]

Originally Posted by kyp275

Can't say I was too thrilled about the news of the spin-offs.... guess we'll just have to wait and see.

I personally do not mind the idea of spin-offs (or side stories as I guess they could be called), I simply dislike the current two ideas (three with Yoda) floating around. We do not need a Han Solo or Boba Fett origin story, especially if Disney is going to throw 100 million at either picture. Frankly, this is lazy thinking, and what's worse it is corporate thinking only, with little regard to the fans. The rumored Seven Samurai inspired Synder film was far more appealing and potentially interesting than anything else rumored so far, but sadly that potentially exciting film is nothing more than rumor with seemingly no basis in reality.

I hope Disney pulls their heads out of their asses and realizes the real potential of their recent buy.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

What we need, is for Episode 7 to introduce new heroes (who might already exist in novels) who then get their own films.

The old side cast just aren't meant for movies.

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

What we need, is for Episode 7 to introduce new heroes (who might already exist in novels) who then get their own films.

The old side cast just aren't meant for movies.

I think the best thing to do would be to start far enough forward in time that no characters from the original trilogy appear (or at least have major parts).

Take the KotoR approach.

[ChainLegacy]

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

I think the best thing to do would be to start far enough forward in time that no characters from the original trilogy appear (or at least have major parts).

Take the KotoR approach.

Indeed, or, as with Knights, make it take place at some point in the distant past. The universe Star Wars created is, honestly, the strongest aspect of the franchise and capable of producing a greater story than the original trilogy.