- Marvel vs. DC; Bond vs. Bourne; Star Trek vs. Star Wars—there are some pop-cultural divides that are not meant to bridged. And yet here we are, with J.J. Abrams, whose second Trek movie is due out in May, now announced as the director of a new Star Wars film slated for 2015, the first of a trilogy under the umbrella of Disney, which acquired Lucasfilm last year. I cannot be alone in fearing a rift in the fabric of space/time.
I'm continually baffled by the fixation on the director as the salvation or damnation of the films. He doesn't write them. Star Trek was penned by Orci and Kurtzman and overseen by at least five exec producers all of whom would have had a hand in a) the sacrilegious violation of canon when turning the Star Trek universe into one which dealt with a pin-headed plot of good versus evil; or b) the refreshing reboot of an ageing and overly-optimistic world mired in a 60's mentality. Pick one. Between them those two were also responsible for The Island, Transformers and Cowboys And Aliens, those paragons of thoughtful, profoundly philosophical SF. Orci exec produced The Proposal, for Zeus' sake, a film in which one of the highest ranked scenes of comedy features a lapdog being savaged by a hawk. Abrams himself could have directed Phantom Menace and made it edgier, more gripping and a more memorable film even given the breath-taking failures in the script because he's a good director. He would have made some executive calls in the plotting, probably, and they would have improved the final cut. However fundamental hinges to storyworld logic are choices made far earlier.
See, now that's a hot plate of bullshit. The Star Wars movies have always been Kurusawa samurai films with space ships welded onto them. Star Wars is a feudal hegemony whose existence is threatened by upstart messiahs. That's not a "vision" worthy of adulation, it's a massive handicap for things that generally look totally awesome.And although George Lucas is involved in the project (the story will evidently be based on an arc he has envisioned for decades, and he will serve as "creative consultant"), his failings have typically been of execution rather than broader vision
It doesn't matter who directs the movie. Its going to suck in principle. The Empire now owns the franchise. Are they going to have Luke realize that his father was deluded when he killed the Emperor and switched back to the Light side, and Luke now sees how the Empire was really providing good, stable jobs to all the Storm Troopers, so he ascends the throne and betrays all the Rebels? Or maybe they'll make it the story of how if you're a really pretty and nice girl, you can marry up in life.
Niether. Just more stuff like Jar-Jar so they can hock more toys and merchandise surrounding the releases. Anybody want to bet otherwise? I will make a prediction though, -I think the writing will actually be better. "The Empire" has a gift for narrative that the last three movies stood to benefit from. Still gonna suck.
I'm not sure how I feel about Abrams. I hope that he is able to ad some grit to the films, perhaps make them a bit darker and less one dimensional. Joss Whedon would have been awesome in this regard. Space shouldn't be all bright and shiny all the time.
Well, he did the exact opposite to Star Trek, then again both franchises have different vantage-points.
I wonder what he is going to do with Star Wars. Trek was a complete reboot and pretty much kicked the established lore in the ass (I personally think it was an entertaining popcorn movie, but the setting was hardly Star Trek, it really was quite interchangeable..). But the franchise was basically dead at that point and it didn't go peacefully with Nemesis as the last movie. But Star Wars? There's no need for a reboot - in my opinion at least, yet there's no obvious starting-point for a story to tell. True, the lat three movies weren't really critically acclaimed, but Star Wars is far from the shape Trek was in during Nemesis.
There are a lot of stories that could be turned to films, the whole extended universe thing and the comic book series, which feature a few rather gritty plots (beloved characters die, Luke turning to the dark side, etc...).
But Star Wars? There's no need for a reboot
That depends on what your definitions for success are. If you define it as making money and generating interest, then you are right, there is no need for a re-boot. If you define it as making good films that could stand the test of time, then I think they should take the boot and re it.
Yeah, it wasn't bad but it wasn't great either. It was entertaining but not memorable. It was popcorn. I want Star Wars to have more substance, like what Christopher Nolan did for the Batman franchise. Give it some substance, some grit. Let the heroes be fallible and potentially tragically flawed. I don't see this as a direction Abrams would go in. Could be bad.
I think "darker and grittier" is usually the opposite of substance, or rather, I think there's a tendency for writers and the like to think that darker and grittier means more substantial. But dark and gritty is an aesthetic, and nothing more. Like Dragon Age, the series that thinks blood and sex make a story mature, or, for that matter, the Nolan Batman movies, which sidestep the question of how to make a convincing villain by instead telling us that some men want to watch the world burn. No, I think in practice adding darkness to Star Wars, a franchise that's already truly awful, would just turn it into the middle schooler that takes up smoking cigarettes to appear cultured.perhaps make them a bit darker and less one dimensional.
Give it some substance, some grit.
But dark and gritty is an aesthetic, and nothing more.
Dialog, plot lines and character development can all be dark and gritty. It's not just an aesthetic.
Wow, they should have gotten Nolan. I don't even like Star Wars and I would preorder tickets to that. Can you imagine? "You've given these Ewoks everything!"
"Not everything. Not yet."
"You've given these Ewoks everything!" "Not everything. Not yet."
-I love it, that is a scene I could heartedly endorse.