J.J. Abrams wants to take 'Star Wars: Episode VII' back to the series' grittier roots

[Wing]

Didn't say you did, including them in the same sentence in the first place is a little baffling. Unless your sentence is:

''Uhura in the Abrams films is nothing like and bears absolutely no connections to Ellen Ripley from the Alien films.''

Okay.

Anyhow, would like to see a character along the lines of Ripley in the new Star Wars films.

 

[Ping]

The only thing that worries me about this is that the definition of "dark and gritty" has kind of changed somewhat since the OT has been made.

 

[Chronicled]

k.

Still don't want the movies to happen, but hey, this is good for people who do.

Oh my glob, someone who agrees with me. I really don't want them to happen, and even if I did I most certainly would NOT want J.J. Abrams to be directing it.
/Slitmywrists

 

[Kaeb]

Just let the franchise die is what I say.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

If any outlets are reporting that Abrams has said it will be dark and gritty, they're either lying or confused about what he means by gritty (I don't think he even said the word "dark"). Gritty, in Star Wars, has always meant functional. It's not about the sleek starships from Naboo or Coruscant. It's about the dinged up, barely working ships where you can see all the nuts and bolts. That recent Dear J.J. video said it well: Star Wars is a second-hand universe, meaning the look of it should feel like it's old and worn out. That's not to say that there's no room for sleeker stuff - even Cloud City was pretty sleek - but Star Wars shouldn't like sleek and polished like it did in the prequels.

Just let the franchise die is what I say.

Glad you posted that, since we didn't hear you the first bagillion times. ;)

 

[Kaeb]

u mad bro?

 

[Blaxican]

You guys should fight each other irl

 

[Kaeb]

I'm Irish.

I'll win.

Or randomly pass out, it isn't entirely clear.

 

[Blaxican]

If you're Irish, those both count as wins.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

I'm Irish descent, but trained in New Jersey.

watch out bitch

 

[Kaeb]

If you're from New Jersey I'll stay away from you, but mostly for reasons of basic hygiene and sanitation.

 

[BLADE]

There's a reason Mary is a popular name in New Jersey, and it's not just the God-bothering vestment-wearing, toddler-fisting (okay "annointing") Church.

Also, um... yay grit?

Is Lando confirmed yet? That's what the fangirl in me wants to know.

 

[Wing]

I want a good non-Force sensitive Imperial character that is a major player in the new films, something Tarkin could have been.

 

[Cainhurst Crow]

I think disney has shown they can do grit, in my personal opinion. Now what's left is to see if they can resist meddling in the film process.

 

[Vindictive]

There's hope that the writer for empire strikes back is doing the script. And J.J.Abrams is a decent director. The downside; it's Hollywood. They have a knack for ****ing shit up.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

I think disney has shown they can do grit, in my personal opinion. Now what's left is to see if they can resist meddling in the film process.

Define "meddling," then explain why meddling is a bad thing. You see, a long time ago in a bay area far, far away, there lived a young lad named George Lucas. He was a filmmaker and did not like the studio system, because they were all a bunch of corporations that he thought restricted his creative vision. After much success, which came at the price of other people telling him when his bad ideas were bad, he finally achieved the independence he so intensely craved. With 20th Century Fox only a distributor, this filmmaker was able to make any film he wanted however he wanted.

So he made the prequel trilogy and they sucked.

George Lucas was the studio. He didn’t have to answer to anyone. If he had a studio, or at least other people, involved in the process, they might have told him when his bad ideas were bad again. Say what you want about Disney, but they paid $4 billion for Star Wars and they don’t want it screwed up anymore than you do. The fact that Star Wars is now owned by a massive profit-generating corporation (which, by the way, is what Lucasfilm was) is a plus, not a negative, in my book.

Over the last 15 years, Lucas made Star Wars on whim and greed. Disney will make it on caution and greed, and that's way better than the directionless path Star Wars was on over the last decade and a half.

 

[Ten10dix]

They won't intentionally mess it up, that sort of thing won't sell.

I'm just worried they accidentally mess it up. The prequels didn't bother me too much, because I wasn't really focused on the story but the universe itself. Same with the prequels, really. The story was meh, but I just love this universe. A perfect mix of Sci Fi and Fantasy with loads of potential.

It would still be a shame if the upcoming movies are bad, though. If its great, then the franchise becomes popular again meaning more Star Wars stuff. If not, then it'll just continue on like it is. No problem with that, it'll simply be a missed opportunity.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

They won't intentionally mess it up, that sort of thing won't sell.

I'm just worried they accidentally mess it up. The prequels didn't bother me too much, because I wasn't really focused on the story but the universe itself. Same with the prequels, really. The story was meh, but I just love this universe. A perfect mix of Sci Fi and Fantasy with loads of potential.

It would still be a shame if the upcoming movies are bad, though. If its great, then the franchise becomes popular again meaning more Star Wars stuff. If not, then it'll just continue on like it is. No problem with that, it'll simply be a missed opportunity.

It actually won’t continue like it is. If Episode VII is bad, then less people will go to see the rest of the movies because they’ll assume Star Wars is still bad and will remain bad. Unlike the sequels, the prequels were still successful because Lucas still had enough goodwill from the originals. We all saw the prequels. None of us thought “well, we’ll just skip them.” We also went there because we knew what the story was. The prequels came with a promise, that they’d show the rise of Darth Vader, so we all went to see it no matter how bad those movies were.

The sequels don’t have that good will, they have cautious optimism. They don’t have a promise, a light at the end of the tunnel. If Episode VII is bad, it kills Disney’s long term Star Wars plans. It has to be good; doesn’t have to be great, it just can’t leave people feeling burned again.

 

[Kaeb]

I've talked with Bac about that before, you can have all the greatest intentions in the world, but your work can still end up sucking. There's just way too many contributing factors because it's such a collaborative process that has to be undertaken in incredibly short amounts of time with incredible amounts of money.

Truth be told, all we've got so far is:

Different fat cats are backing it.

They hired a competent action director.

They hired the scribe responsible for arguably the most adored film by the fans.

They really really really want us to think it'll be like or at the very least inspired by the original films, but that means almost nothing until they prove it.

Zack Snyder said he was influenced by ****ing ancient mythology for Man of Shit, and look how that turned out.


It's all marketing folks, I'd wait for a trailer or at the very least a piece of concept art before making any solid judgements about the films as a whole.

 

[Cainhurst Crow]

"Meddling" to me would be trying to have the story or characters be played too safe, basically turning caution into over-cautiousness, and making everything as toned down as possible. Softening it up, so that you have the main characters and their exploits appeal to as many parents as possible to make them feel safe letting their kids see the films. Make sure the story is accessible to everyone, and that the plots don't deviate too much from what was shown to work previously. Whether that means making sure the main characters never are shown killing someone or are made to keep deaths to a painful minimum, are required to take along a secondary character to help lighten the mood and keep scenes from being too dark, or just have sequences be cartoony and over the top in order to make audiences understand that this isn't real and is just entertainment. Basically, I fear the studios will apply old man lucas or old man spielberg sensibility to scenes and make them not as gritty nor dark as they should be, not even what they could be, because to them that is what it means to play it safe. And that they will make efforts to ensure the story is pretty much the same as the other star wars films, because that was shown to statistically sell more.

I think breaking the hegemony/monopoly that was george lucas's hold on the series is a good thing. Disney owning it means they'll do whatever it takes to make profit from the films, tv shows, all properties pretty much. It can act as a much needed tether to pull the writers and directors and even producers back down to earth and keep dumb ideas from being unquestioned. I just feel that there are risks involved as well in involving a company that needs to be concerned with an image, and whose track record as of late in doing more "serious minded" as I would call it, films has been rather hit and miss.