Chen G.

I have to say, all these comparisons to Marvel as a kind of more favourable example, are kind of panging at me. Yes, Star Wars is very uneven, unbalanced and, especially under Disney, suffers the most terrible inflation of content. But - a few flourishes from Rian Johnson notwithstanding - at least Star Wars is always earnest. Its not very serious a lot of the time, but at least its played straight, which is more than could be said for the Cutesie Kiddie CrapTM known as Marvel... Those movies have all the intensity of watching Teletubbies on the big-screen.

To me, Legend is the quintessential Ridley Scott turkey: a film of such lustrous pictorial beauty as to dazzle the eye, but all in the service of a screenplay so stupid, that it was either written by guinea pig rather than a human, or it was written by a human and one just didn't use the right definition for what encompasses "human"...

It has. Also with all the spinoffs properties: at first glance, the idea of films between-the-films like Rogue One seemed like a pretty succesfull idea. But now, there's so much content shoved in between the "story" entries...its like a feast that's 80% entremets and 20% actual food.

Right. I personally believe Lucas would have never given us a sequel trilogy: I think its scarcely a coincidence that virtually all the details that have come out on his treatment, concern themselves with Episode VII, and not with VIII and IX. Lucas was never one to plan ahead in much detail, and I see little reason to assume it would be any different here.

I'd put less faith into all the stories about how his sequel trilogy was going to revolve around the microscopic world of the Midichlorians and/or the crime world of the New Republic under Darth Maul...both are from AFTER The Force Awakens and The Last Jedi had been released, and smack to me of apocrypha. But the basic premise -- young girl from a backwaters planet, with sidekick in tow, undertake a quest to find the reclusive Luke Skywalker, while being menaced by pirates and a masked "Jedi killer" and their overlord, and with the son of Han and Leia being thrown somewhere into the mix - does read quite close in premise to The Force Awakens, to me.

Oh, I agree. But he still approved the idea of it, was party to the public announcement of it, roped the old cast in, and helped write and design it: there's more of Lucas' outline in the finished film than some people give credit: https://medium.com/@Oozer3993/george-lucas-episode-vii-c272563cc3ba

A-propos the Rey film, which is clearly Episode X in all but name.... Its incredible that we had a series of film, which for all intents and purposes ended pretty definitively in 1983, then had a kind of victory lap in 2005. AND THEN somebody (George Walton Lucas Junior) said: "Well, you know what, that wasn't the end" and Disney proceeded to drag out three more films, ending on the most pathetic whimper of all time, AND NOW they're effectivelly saying: Hang go, actually that still wasn't the end: now THIS is the end." Its like a farce.

And Vader (Lucas' original idea was he and Ben would return in the flesh at the end). The infatuation with Bettelheim (actually, with Disney) only went so far: even the Ewok films have a body count...

Yes. I don't think George asked him, frankly: it was just Ford's own personal fancy. But Kasdan, in the story conferences and in one of his drafts, activelly lobbied to kill-of Lando. Lucas considered it, but ultimately didn't let it pass. He was really getting into Bettelheim's book at the time and became enamoured with the idea of the fairytale happy ending and "everyone lives happily ever after and nothing bad ever happens to anyone."

Lando. The character Kasdan tried to kill off was Lando, not Han. And yes, the story is Lucas'. He wrote two drafts of it - pretty close to the finished film - before even inviting Kasdan for a story conference. But in terms of the mise-en-scene, I'm pretty sure he let Marquand at the very least deal with the day-by-day logistics of it.

Yes, all the evidence is Lucas was pretty hands-on on Return of the Jedi. But I think this description is exaggerated: if the film was really directed-from-the-back-seat by Lucas (which Marquand, as well as his DP, denied), it would have a more Lucas-like sensibility than it does. Lucas still needed a competent director who knew how to work with actors, and how to block a scene and edit a movie.

It was a joke... And besides, a motif can be a rhythm...

Pffft! For those kinds of conversations, you open with "Das ist Karfreitagszauber, herr" or "Wintersturme wichen den wonnemond" (depending on your voice type) and then you get to Williams.

Music is music! Why should listening to Horner or Williams be considered less "cultured" an exercise than listening to Humperdinck or Faure?

Must... resist...urge...to...make...parallel...to...the...descent...into...Nibelheim...

It does have that kind of ostinato going on, though...

How so?

I was thinking of that, too. But I think, whatever way we want to divide Williams' filmography, ultimately there was always a dichotomy between his more dramatic works, and his more swashbuckling ones. They almost always inhabited different sound worlds.

Its a combination of that, and Williams' own desire to keep things fresh: he usually just does it with the motivic language, but in a few places - Azkaban, The Lost World - he pretty much overhauls the entire soundscape (which, I think, was going a little overboard on his part). What I repeatedly marvel at, is that its not just different themes or even a different sound: its also a different structure. The first two scores are built in the Lohengrin mould, where there's "good magic" music and "evil magic" music, and the good magic wins. There's less of that sense of juxtaposition in Azkaban.

With the added distinction that Giacchino made a score to an actual sequel, and therefore could and did use the John Williams themes. Bear isn't really doing that, and indeed cannot do it.

Why must you make me hungry!

But he didn't. He took his own musical language, and gave it a Howard Shore paintjob.

I'm often left thinking that. I think the third Harry Potter is an outlier in this regard: Williams ALWAYS tries to keep his serialised scores sounding fresh. Usually, its through the motivic language, but sometimes he goes reinvents the entire sound world between entries: he did it with The Lost World, and he did it (prompted by Cuaron) with the third Harry Potter. But Harry Potter is not insignificant in this discussion because, while Williams 1970s-1980s scores have a particular sound, I feel like somewhere in the mid 1990s we can demarcate a somewhat different soundscape, whose trappings we mostly associate with the early Potters: certainly, Home Alone and parts of The Phantom Menace remind me of the "Potter" sound, as does later stuff like The Force Awakens.

It is very well scored! Its jus the timbral 'memberberries stick out... That, and those parts of the score that ARE by Howard Shore et al.

I think most people instinctively notice that the score sounds nothing like Shore's. They may not be able to articulate exactly why, but one just feels it. Just the fact that somebody slapped a tin whistle here and there doesn't really change that.