Rian Johnson developing a fourth Star Wars trilogy... Oh my..

[Nick1Ø66 4,714]

6 hours ago, Denise Bryson said:

 

Huh? How exactly are they doing that?

 

China Makes Major Change To 'Solo: A Star Wars Story' Title Following 'Last Jedi' Performance

 

Quote

The official title for the movie in China is reportedly Ranger Solo and they completely dropped the Star Wars from the original title. 

 

 

[Holko 9,526]

Star Wars fatigue is really easy to counter: stop making the bloody things yearly. After Ep9, we could get the Obi-Wan movie with ewan everyone seems to want (to make it clear they're listening to those "hardcore fans") then stop everything for a few years. 

[Nick Parker 3,040]

So people throw tomatoes at a movie about a young Han Solo, but when it comes to a movie about Obi Wan Kenobi where he's on a desert for twenty years between two movies in which we know where he's been and where he's going, "hardcore fans" are saying, "SEE!? That's what we want! FINALLY The Mouse listens!"

[Holko 9,526]

Star Wars fans are weird. I, for one, don't care about that Obi-Wan movie (or the Han Solo one, for that matter), but it seems to be the hot thing.

[Nick1Ø66 4,714]

 

22 minutes ago, Nick Parker said:

So people throw tomatoes at a movie about a young Han Solo, but when it comes to a movie about Obi Wan Kenobi where he's on a desert for twenty years between two movies in which we know where he's been and where he's going, "hardcore fans" are saying, "SEE!? That's what we want! FINALLY The Mouse listens!"

 

I think there are some distinctions between a Han Solo and Obi-Wan movie.

 

No one really wanted to see Han Solo recast, given that his age will be so close to the age Harrison Ford played the character. For Obi-Wan in the prequels, his recasting was a necessity, and people are used to seeing younger version of older characters recast. It happens all the time. But Harrison Ford is so closely tied to that character, I can understand the pushback. There's is virtually no chance anyone will look at Ehrenreich's performance and be convinced or satisfied with it. No one was ever really going to compare McGregor and Alec Guinness. And in any event, McGregor's performance is one of the few things that was fondly received by most fans, so it's not surprising people want to see him return to the role.

 

Secondly, Obi-Wan's backstory is central to Star Wars mythology. It's mentioned in every film in the OT, and you couldn't have the PT without him.  Han Solo's history is irrelevant and something pretty much no one was asking for.

 

And finally, I don't know that we know Obi-Wan never left Tatooine.  That's an assumption.

 

36 minutes ago, Holko said:

Star Wars fatigue is really easy to counter: stop making the bloody things yearly. After Ep9, we could get the Obi-Wan movie with ewan everyone seems to want (to make it clear they're listening to those "hardcore fans") then stop everything for a few years. 

 

I take your point, but I somewhat disagree. I think they could make SW movies as often as they make MCU films, as long as the story and characters are good. That's a huge universe to explore, and the main saga only scratches the surface. I'm not saying that all the MCU films are good by a long shot, just that people don't seem to have burned out on them (based on the box office).

 

That's why I had no issue with subverting and expanding the Star Wars mythology, I just didn't think the main saga (e.g. TLJ) was the place to do it.

 

That said, the days that Star Wars movies are regarded as something special will end with Episode IX (if they haven't ended already).

[Chen G. 3,949]

20 minutes ago, Nick1066 said:

I think there are some distinctions between a Han Solo and Obi-Wan movie.

 

But the important aspect that both projects share is that they don't push the overarching narrative of the series (i.e. the galactic struggle) and are therefore redundant.

[Nick1Ø66 4,714]

28 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

 

But the important aspect that both projects share is that they don't push the overarching narrative of the series (i.e. the galactic struggle) and are therefore redundant.

 

I don't know if that aspect is that important. You could say that any story outside the main saga doesn't "push the overarching narrative of the series". If that were the case, Episode IX would be the last film (unless they make Episode X).

 

We all know Disney is planning on making films outside the main saga, they have to if the franchise if going to survive, so from that point of view these spin off films aren't redundant or superfluous, but rather essential. The important aspect is not whether they tell stories outside the main saga (they must), but which stories they choose to tell. 

[Chen G. 3,949]

Well, Rogue One very much played into the narrative of the series. I don't see why other spin-off shouldn't do the same.

[Nick1Ø66 4,714]

I think every movie being about the Empire vs. the Republic/Rebellion/Resistance would get very old, very fast. 

 

If anything the new trilogy demonstrates they're running out of ideas on that front already. It's not sustainable, creatively. 

[Chen G. 3,949]

If that's not sustainable, than Star Wars is not sustainable.

 

It may share a universe with Star Wars, but if its not about the Galactic Struggle, its not Star Wars.

[Bespin 8,480]

Star Wars is about the struggle between the light side and the dark side of the Force.

 

I hope Johnson is developping a new trilogy about Ewoks.

 

[Chen G. 3,949]

13 minutes ago, Bespin said:

Star Wars is about the struggle between the light side and the dark side of the Force.

 

Indeed. It it’s not that - it’s not really Star Wars. The universe is only the stage on which this conflict is presented to the audience.

 

How exactly is a Han Solo origin story going to explore that struggle?

[Bespin 8,480]

15 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

How exactly is a Han Solo origin story going to explore that struggle?

 

It won't.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Does it have to? Why does Star Wars need to limit itself so narrowly?

[crumbs 14,313]

The way Johnson's serving up platitudes for Johnny lately, you'd think he'll ask him to score at least the first film in this new trilogy (to establish the new themes and musical palette, at a minimum).

 

Guess it depends how quickly they get these movies up and running. For now, I'll just be happy if he finishes IX and completes his trilogy of trilogies.

[Chen G. 3,949]

5 hours ago, Denise Bryson said:

Does it have to? Why does Star Wars need to limit itself so narrowly?

 

Yes, it has to do, because that's how film works. Harry Potter isn't about the Wizarding world, its about the struggle against Voldemort. The Middle Earth films aren't about Middle Earth: They're about the fight against the Dark Lord, be it Sauron or Morgoth. Film is driven by conflict. The world is just the stage for that conflict.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Not all films are driven by conflict. Some are about exploration, others are driven by characters or relationships, etc.

[Chen G. 3,949]

No.

 

But even if it were, the point is a film isn't driven by the world is inhabits. The world is just the stage for the conflict. An important stage, but a stage nonetheless.

 

If it doesn't deal with the galactic struggle of good and bad (embodied by the fight between the Rebels and Empire or otherwise) than it is Star Wars only by name.

[Pieter Boelen 740]

1 hour ago, Chen G. said:

 

Yes, it has to do, because that's how film works. Harry Potter isn't about the Wizarding world, its about the struggle against Voldemort. The Middle Earth films aren't about Middle Earth: They're about the fight against the Dark Lord, be it Sauron or Morgoth. Film is driven by conflict. The world is just the stage for that conflict.

And yet, I'd like seeing alternate stories in each of those universes.

They'd be different and not very integral to the overarching narrative.

But that doesn't mean they can't be worthwhile in their own ways.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,521]

2 hours ago, Chen G. said:

 

Yes, it has to do, because that's how film works. Harry Potter isn't about the Wizarding world, its about the struggle against Voldemort. The Middle Earth films aren't about Middle Earth: They're about the fight against the Dark Lord, be it Sauron or Morgoth. Film is driven by conflict. The world is just the stage for that conflict.

 

So...everything is actually about something else? Yes, cinema is entirely metaphorical, but what's wrong with it being literal, as well?

 

#All the world's indeed a stage

  And we are merely players,

  Performers and portrayers-

  Each another's audience outside the     gilded cage#

[Chen G. 3,949]

Just now, Richard said:

Yes, cinema is entirely metaphorical, but what's wrong with it being literal, as well?

 

Not what I said.

 

I loathe metaphorical cinema.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,521]

If you loathe metaphorical cinema, then you might as well give up watching films, right now 

Can you unpack what it is that you are trying to say?

[Chen G. 3,949]

That a film (and by extension, a film series) needs conflict to drive the plot. The conflict is within the universe of the film, its not necessarily an allegory to a real-world conflict of any kind. The conflict doesn't have to be of a belligerent nature: it can also be an internal conflict of a character, but by definition, conflict is central to any narrative work.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Isnt metaphorical art a different thing than allegorical art?

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home had no conflict at all. Just a problem to solve.

[Nick1Ø66 4,714]

15 hours ago, Chen G. said:

If that's not sustainable, than Star Wars is not sustainable.

 

It may share a universe with Star Wars, but if its not about the Galactic Struggle, its not Star Wars.

 

Rubbish.

11 hours ago, Denise Bryson said:

Does it have to? Why does Star Wars need to limit itself so narrowly?

 

It doesn't. 

 

In fact, the scope of the story began to change after the first film, when it was narrowed from a galactic war between the Empire and Rebellion to focus more on the Skywalker family. This is something Gary Kurtz specifically said, and Lucas himself said that the movies are ultimately about the Skywalkers.  If anything, you could make the argument that any film that isn't about the Skywalkers isn't really "Star Wars."  Which of course again is rubbish.

 

@Chen G. may have his own notions of what Star Wars is about, but that's clearly not in line with the vision of the creator, nor the people who have now been entrusted to its legacy (for better or worse).

 

[Chen G. 3,949]

Than what is Star Wars in itself? what is its nature?

[Nick1Ø66 4,714]

2 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

Than what is Star Wars in itself? what is its nature?

 

To covet.

[1977 1,743]

18 hours ago, Nick1066 said:

That's why I had no issue with subverting and expanding the Star Wars mythology, I just didn't think the main saga (e.g. TLJ) was the place to do it.

 

This. To the power of ten.

[crumbs 14,313]

18 hours ago, Nick1066 said:

That's why I had no issue with subverting and expanding the Star Wars mythology, I just didn't think the main saga (e.g. TLJ) was the place to do it.

 

Everyone would be bitching and complaining if he'd just regurgitated ESB. Star Wars fans are coming across as increasingly insufferable.

[Chen G. 3,949]

I think he did regurgitate Empire Strikes Back in the single and most important sense: Empire Strikes Back is a film with a big surprise. So Johnson made sure to make his middle chapter surprising, in every single turn of the story.

 

That's the real issue with The Last Jedi: that it eschews planting-and-payoff, pace, suspense and even drama for the sake of "surprising" the audience, only to end up with a film that is completely and utterly overbearing in its propensity to twist and turn.

 

Outside of its derivative nature, was there anything in The Force Awakens that surprised you? could you not see the end coming a mile away? did it make it any less dramatic?

[Mephariel 451]

On 1/28/2018 at 6:24 AM, Chen G. said:

I think he did regurgitate Empire Strikes Back in the single and most important sense: Empire Strikes Back is a film with a big surprise. So Johnson made sure to make his middle chapter surprising, in every single turn of the story.

 

That's the real issue with The Last Jedi: that it eschews planting-and-payoff, pace, suspense and even drama for the sake of "surprising" the audience, only to end up with a film that is completely and utterly overbearing in its propensity to twist and turn.

 

Outside of its derivative nature, was there anything in The Force Awakens that surprised you? could you not see the end coming a mile away? did it make it any less dramatic?

 

I completely disagree with this. I wish The Last Jedi surprised me. What exactly was so surprising about it? Everything go exactly as it should. Game of Thrones was surprising. Not this.

[The Illustrious Jerry 3,356]

I'm a big Star Wars fan but a fourth trilogy...

 

Not sure how finding a completely new story for Star Wars is going to work. Good luck, Rian!

[Manakin Skywalker 4,892]

5 hours ago, Jerry said:

Star Wars will never not be exciting and awesome for me. A fourth trilogy though...

I'll watch it but I need to know what it is about. How can Rian create something Star Wars that isn't part of the Star Wars saga we already know?

Good luck. Don't JJ this thing, Rian.

There are hundreds of books and video games that have nothing to do with the main saga. Star Wars isn't bound to the Skywalker saga, and shouldn't be. There is an infinite amount of stories that could be told, and an endless timeline to set them in. Personally I'm sick of seeing stormtroopers in every single film.

[The Illustrious Jerry 3,356]

Fair enough. I'm talking about the movies though, not books and comics. 

[Chen G. 3,949]

Indeed.

 

If its not about the struggle against the sith and the Empire, what is it that makes it Star Wars?

[Nick1Ø66 4,714]

On 1/28/2018 at 9:34 AM, Chen G. said:

 

Yes, it has to do, because that's how film works. Harry Potter isn't about the Wizarding world, its about the struggle against Voldemort. The Middle Earth films aren't about Middle Earth: They're about the fight against the Dark Lord, be it Sauron or Morgoth. Film is driven by conflict. The world is just the stage for that conflict.

 

So? This is a straw man.

 

You can have conflict in Star Wars without it being the Empire vs. Rebellion, and you can  have conflict in the Wizarding World without it being Harry Potter vs. Voldemort.

 

You really can't mean this argument you're making. Or if you do, you haven't thought it through.

 

What is Star Wars? It's any authorised story set in that universe. 

[Chen G. 3,949]

You're talking from a story standpoint, not from a cinematic one.

 

To my mind, the boon of a multi-story narrative (a "cinematic universe") is that you can shape it such that it has an ebb-and-flow akin to a single, huge, three-act screenplay: that it sets up, builds and brings a conclusion to a certain cast of characters and a certain conflict, within a certain setting. So you can use the multi-film form to create bigger stakes and more nuanced characters and conflict than any single, standalone film will allow for.

 

Once we start moving from that into spin-offs that don't serve that purpose but rather branch out of the main narrative with no objective to branch back in - that, to me, in narratively redundant, and by that token, hollow. It might as well be its own thing, entirely.

[mstrox 6,651]

I'm excited to at least attempt to like any adventure movie about rogues with rayguns and monks with laser swords they'll throw at me.

[Chen G. 3,949]

I'm not saying I won't be enjoying the films as standalone pieces. But, if they're episodic, they'll never work for me as part of this bigger tapestry of Star Wars, and so they might as well be of a different brand alltogether as far as I'm concerned.

[Nick1Ø66 4,714]

15 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

To my mind, the boon of a multi-story narrative (a "cinematic universe") is that you can shape it such that it has an ebb-and-flow akin to a single, huge, three-act screenplay: that it sets up, builds and concludes a certain cast of character and a certain conflict.

 

Once we start moving from that into spin-offs that don't serve that purpose but rather branch out of the main narrative with no objective to branch back in - that, to me, in narratively redundant.

 

Well, you don't like spin offs, and think the stories told in these "universes" should be limited to the parameters of the original narrative...that's fine, that's your preference.

But the suggestion that you can't have conflict, or a "narrative" outside the original story really doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Of course you can have conflict, and of course you can expand those stories.  The issue, again, is which stories you choose to tell and how well you tell them. The fact that there are many, many authorised Star Wars stories outside of the central conflict is evidence enough that Star Wars is more than you're suggesting.

 

You're not making an argument for what Star Wars is...we know what it is. You're making an argument for what you think it should be.

[Chen G. 3,949]

I'm making an argument as to what Star Wars is cinematically.

 

Not what it is in terms of its own universe.

[gkgyver 1,645]

How is TLJ surprising in any sense of the word? Underwhelming would be the better word.

 

If you define surprising as something the audience doesn't expect, then that's not automatically a positive. Sometimes people don't expect something because nobody wanted it to happen.

 

Like the monumental waste that is Snoke.

[mstrox 6,651]

Star Wars has evolved what it is cinematically with every new installment.  Some of the evolutions have been fairly drastic turns from their theatrical predecessors both in content and format (The Phantom Menace, The Clone Wars, Rogue One).  Prepare yourself now:  Lucasfilm is going to continue releasing yearly Star Wars movies, and eventually they're going to drift out of the 50 year buffer comfort zone of Rebels Vs. Empire/Jedi vs. Sith that is represented in The Phantom Menace through The Last Jedi and Episode IX.  Sometimes more drastically than others.

 

In the end, what Star Wars "is" cinematically will depend on what's released in cinemas.  Lucasfilm determines what satisfies Star Wars cinematically.

[Chen G. 3,949]

20 minutes ago, gkgyver said:

If you define surprising as something the audience doesn't expect, then that's not automatically a positive. Sometimes people don't expect something because nobody wanted it to happen.

 

I like to describe it based on the way Hitchcock contrasted surprise with suspense and, by extension, contrasted both from tension: 

 

The story calls for two people conversing over a table, under which a ticking time bomb has been rigged to explode. Surprise would be them blowing up without us or them having known of the bomb's existence to begin with. Tension would be us and the characters knowing there's a bomb, but not knowing where it is, and looking out for it. Suspense would be us, the audience, know that there's a bomb, and the characters not knowing so. The difference compared to other two being that here the audience has information that the characters do not.

 

If you choose to go with the surprise tactic, the way to make it not feel cheap is to build up towards it. If Empire Strikes Back had handled Darth Vader as he was in the original Star Wars, and maybe even chose to reveal his identity at the more traditional placing (i.e. the midpoint, where Snoke dies, or where Anakin turns to darkness in Revenge of the Sith, for instance), it wouldn't have the impact that it did. It has impact because his character and his menace are built up throughout the film, leading up to the surprise.

[Nick1Ø66 4,714]

21 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

I'm making an argument as to what Star Wars is cinematically.

 

Not what it is in terms of its own universe.

 

Cinematically, as soon as they make a movie outside of the main conflict, Star Wars is something different then what you think it should be. And we already know they have those plans.  I promise you, each of those films will have conflict. And these limits you're setting are arbitrary anyway...whose to say that any story not revolving around the Skywalkers isn't "Star Wars"?

 

Star Trek was about a crew on a space ship exploring the universe..."To Boldly Go Where No Man Has Gone Before..."  Then someone decided to create a show set on a space station, set in that same universe, and we got arguably the best Star Trek show yet, and certainly one of the most loved by fans. And no one denies DS9 is Star Trek.

 

Well, maybe you.

[Chen G. 3,949]

Some series' carve an episodic nature for themselves from the very beginning: Indiana Jones doesn't have a throughline of a narrative - its episodic. Star Trek is the same, essentially.

 

Star Wars isn't episodic, and that it is the way that it is (thus far) is important to the identity of the franchise because that's what gives this series its sense of myth, compared to those other examples.

[Nick1Ø66 4,714]

9 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

Star Wars isn't episodic, and that it is the way that it is (thus far) is important to the identity of the franchise because that's what gives this series its sense of myth, compared to those other examples.

 

Ugh. Are you being intentionally obtuse?

 

You keep saying "Star Wars is..." or "Star Wars isn't..."  Where are you getting this? At best you mean, "Up to now, Star Wars has been this. Now they're changing what it's been so far and i don't like it. Because I don't like change. Or because conflict. Or something."

 

It's OK that you don't like what they're doing with Star Wars. I might even agree with you. But that doesn't mean it's not Star Wars. I assure you, it is. And there will be the lunch boxes to prove it.

 

 

[Giftheck 916]

On 28/01/2018 at 8:51 AM, crumbs said:

The way Johnson's serving up platitudes for Johnny lately, you'd think he'll ask him to score at least the first film in this new trilogy (to establish the new themes and musical palette, at a minimum).

 

Guess it depends how quickly they get these movies up and running. For now, I'll just be happy if he finishes IX and completes his trilogy of trilogies.

 

While I'd like John to be around for a while yet, I'm wondering if Episode IX might be his 'retiring point' for Star Wars. By the time he finishes Episode IX, he'll be 87, and if we were to assume that Obi-Wan is after Episode IX, he'd be 89 at least, depending on how quickly it gets up and running, as you say. I wouldn't be too surprised if Indiana Jones 5 would be his last film in general either.

[Chen G. 3,949]

16 minutes ago, Nick1066 said:

It's OK that you don't like what they're doing with Star Wars. I might even agree with you. But that doesn't mean it's not Star Wars. I assure you, it is. And there will be the lunch boxes to prove it.

 

Again, that's either from an executive or an in-universe story standpoint: "its Star Wars because its marketed as Star Wars" or "its Star Wars because the Mouse said so." I'm talking from a narrative standpoint.

 

We already have nine films (and a tenth film on the way) that have solidified what Star Wars is and what it isn't. Anything that Disney does going forward that is in defiance of that, is going to be tacked-on from a narrative standpoint and, to my mind at least, cannot be used to redefine what this series is, because that's already cemented. I'm not saying that as a derogatory term: its okay that a series has a cemented identity. In many ways, it is the secret of the success of Star Wars. Nor does it mean that the films themselves must become repititive.

 

And yes, I also just generally think that episodic Star Wars is a bad idea. But than, I also think that even on the front of the main episodes we are approaching the point where its getting old, too....

 

16 minutes ago, Gistech said:

While I'd like John to be around for a while yet, I'm wondering if Episode IX might be his 'retiring point' for Star Wars. 

 

Also, there aren't going to be more episodes (at least not in the foreseeable future), and Williams only scores those. He may write a theme here and there for the spin-offs, but I don't suppose he'll bother scoring any of them.