Tales Of The Empire (May 4th) - Mini Series

[JNHFan2000 2,974]

Trailer just dropped.

6 episodes. Same way as Tales Of The Jedi explored momemts from Jedi, this goes behind the scenes at the Empire. This trailer looks fantastic!

 

 

Morgan Elsbeth

Thrawn

Grand Inquisitor

Bariss

Grievous

Darth Vader

 

I love the dark side, so this is fantastic!

 

 

[Edmilson 7,506]

More Disney+ Star Wars crap. Sigh 

 

6 minutes ago, JNHFan2000 said:

I love the dark side, so this is fantastic!

 

Please don't choke me to death!

[JNHFan2000 2,974]

I will not hide my excitement!

The animated Star Wars shows are some of the best Star Wars there is.

 

If Kiner (& Co.) are scoring it, I hope the Imperial March returns as well as their own theme for the Grand Inquisitor

[CGCJ 407]

59 minutes ago, JNHFan2000 said:

If Kiner (& Co.) are scoring it

 

[Gabriel Bezerra 308]

1 hour ago, Edmilson said:

More Disney+ Star Wars crap. Sigh 

 

Something tells me you didn't watch Tales of the Jedi

 

Glad we got more animated Star Wars (the best kind of Star Wars) and I hope a new series is soon to be revealed on May 4.

 

It will also fit quite nicely after the Bad Batch finale, continuing with the Empire

[geom_00 36]

This looks FANTASTIC!

 

My wife introduced me to Rebels, Clone Wars, etc. and I've loved all of it.

 

Then again, I am a rather big nerd.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,605]

Welcome back to 'Flogging A Dead Horse'.

[Gabriel Bezerra 308]

 

 

[Edmilson 7,506]

13 minutes ago, Naïve Old Fart said:

Welcome back to 'Flogging A Dead Horse'.

People seeing what Lucasfilm is doing with SW these days:

 

 

(for the record, I'm pretty sure the animated shows are better than the live-action ones, still not enough to make me watch it though)

[Yavar Moradi 2,614]

They might be better than *most* of the live action shows, but none of them is even close to as good as Andor.

 

EDIT after first angry reaction: Hey, if you’ve watched through the prison arc on Andor and think the animated shows are better written, better acted, better told stories… I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree.

 

Yavar

[Faleel 5,382]

48 minutes ago, Yavar Moradi said:

 

 

EDIT after first angry reaction: Hey, if you’ve watched through the prison arc on Andor and think the animated shows are better written, better acted, better told stories… I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree.

 

Yavar

Perhaps thats not what they are angry about, maybe its because this thread is being derailed for yet another Andor gushfest. (Andor is good BTW)

 

 

[Yavar Moradi 2,614]

Wouldn’t call that gushing; all I did was a simple direct response to the blanket claim that “the animated shows are better than the live action ones”.

 

Yavar

[Faleel 5,382]

Anyways...

 

[Schilkeman 972]

9 hours ago, Yavar Moradi said:

Hey, if you’ve watched through the prison arc on Andor and think the animated shows are better written, better acted, better told stories… I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree.

 

Better is subjective. For me, Andor doesn't feel/look/sound like Star Wars. George used film holistically, with a strong emphasis on visual storytelling, not just as set dressing for dialog.

[mstrox 6,654]

This looks rad.

[DarthDementous 1,060]

20 hours ago, Schilkeman said:

Better is subjective. For me, Andor doesn't feel/look/sound like Star Wars. George used film holistically, with a strong emphasis on visual storytelling, not just as set dressing for dialog.

 

Andor has a strong emphasis on visual storytelling. not sure how it's even possible to have missed that

any point about how it doesn't feel like Star Wars needs to explain what feeling like Star Wars even means, you may as well just say 'I wasn't interested in it', it's just going to beg the question as to why specifically

[Chen G. 3,975]

I do think Andor is straddling the line in terms of "feeling like Star Wars." It has almost none of the Burroughs-cum-Tolkien "fairytale" touches that had defined the series in the past: its much, much more sci-fi in the usual sense of the word.

 

I don't think any of this is particularly indebted to it being driven by dialogue (although some portions, like the Mon Mothma scenes, do) and I do think the dichotomy that Herr Schilkeman builds relies too much on viewing Star Wars via what George Lucas says he did with it, rather than by what he actually did. Star Wars had always been very reliant on rat-a-tat dialogue, with some characters lik the Droids or Vader all but entirely dependent on it.

[DarthDementous 1,060]

1 hour ago, Chen G. said:

I do think Andor is straddling the line in terms of "feeling like Star Wars." It has almost none of the Burroughs-cum-Tolkien "fairytale" touches that had defined the series in the past: its much, much more sci-fi in the usual sense of the word.

 

I don't think any of this is particularly indebted to it being driven by dialogue (although some portions, like the Mon Mothma scenes, do) and I do think the dichotomy that Herr Schilkeman builds relies too much on viewing Star Wars via what George Lucas says he did with it, rather than by what he actually did. Star Wars had always been very reliant on rat-a-tat dialogue, with some characters lik the Droids or Vader all but entirely dependent on it.

that I agree with, this is less a fairy tale as it is a cautionary tale. which I would argue, is something Lucas already started to do with Star Wars come the time of the Prequels where we start to see a bit more Dune influence with the idea of the pressure of being the 'Chosen One' being a cursed chalice that leads to tragedy as opposed to a noble higher-calling that leads to a positive transformation of the self

I think that's ultimately what it comes down to. that Star Wars 'feeling' has undergone a lot of change both in Lucas' own works and also the expanded material, the latter of which I'm reasonably familiar with. so when something like Andor comes along, because of my recognition of how Star Wars expanded beyond its initial scope, this still feels within that expanded scope. I think in the past I've referred to this as the closest example of an adaptation of a work from the old expanded universe and I still stand by that

I was actually rather fascinated by RLM's recent Andor review and their suggestion which I think I agree with, that in the mainstream in order for a series like Star Wars to survive and grow you have to ditch the black and white simplistic fairtytale framing because that is doomed to create repetitiveness and staleness, instead opting to shine lights on parts of the series the movies didn't pay much attention to. the more sci-fi aspects, the more political aspects (something that hilariously the Prequels actually fleshed out very little). this is exactly the kind of revolution that happened with the expanded universe, so I'm not surprised in the least that this is resonating with the more mainstream audiences that weren't familiar with what happened in those less popular mediums

 

it's darkly ironic to me that after ditching the material that figured this out decades ago, it took some years of floundering until what currently remains a fluke, to stumble upon this phenomenon again. if Leslie Headland really gets the EU as she says she does, she'll recognise that the Acolyte needs to fulfill pretty much the same role that the Bane Trilogy did which is to paint a far more nuanced version of the Jedi and Sith ideological conflict, and present compelling villains that have a rather fleshed out philosophy and even make you question your own morals at times

[Edmilson 7,506]

9 hours ago, Chen G. said:

Burroughs-cum-Tolkien

Thanks for implating in my mind the image of Burroughs ejaculating in Tolkien 

 

I'm pretty sure somewhere in the internet people you could find this. After all, Rule 34 exists

[Schilkeman 972]

8 hours ago, DarthDementous said:

I was actually rather fascinated by RLM's recent Andor review

I was going to spend way too much time replying to this. Thanks for letting me know I don’t need to bother.

 

TCW tackles a lot of different ideas without forgetting it’s a mash up of Flash Gordon and Thunderbirds. Andor is shot and edited like a modern tv show that happens to have TIE fighters in it. 

[Chen G. 3,975]

20 hours ago, DarthDementous said:

that I agree with, this is less a fairy tale as it is a cautionary tale. which I would argue, is something Lucas already started to do with Star Wars come the time of the Prequels where we start to see a bit more Dune influence with the idea of the pressure of being the 'Chosen One' being a cursed chalice that leads to tragedy as opposed to a noble higher-calling that leads to a positive transformation of the self

I think that's ultimately what it comes down to. that Star Wars 'feeling' has undergone a lot of change both in Lucas' own works and also the expanded material, the latter of which I'm reasonably familiar with. so when something like Andor comes along, because of my recognition of how Star Wars expanded beyond its initial scope, this still feels within that expanded scope. I think in the past I've referred to this as the closest example of an adaptation of a work from the old expanded universe and I still stand by that

 

Oh yes, very much so! The Empire Strikes Back is also along those lines: its really mostly The Ewok Adventure and, to a lesser degree, the original film, that are in that more Tolkienian vein.

[DarthDementous 1,060]

On 07/04/2024 at 7:21 AM, Schilkeman said:

I was going to spend way too much time replying to this. Thanks for letting me know I don’t need to bother.

 

TCW tackles a lot of different ideas without forgetting it’s a mash up of Flash Gordon and Thunderbirds. Andor is shot and edited like a modern tv show that happens to have TIE fighters in it. 

if that's the level of reactionary thinking you're going to display, I'm glad you didn't waste both our times either.

TCW is a mish-mash of different tones and different things Lucas was influenced by that are dialled up or down depending on the arc. sometimes it's Kurosawa, and in a way far more directly than the movies, and sometimes it's the Silmarillion where Lucas gets interested in creation myths and Force deities. sometimes it's taking its cues from more hard sci-fi like The Cube or Bladerunner - it depends on the arc. the irony is something with the tone of Andor could exist pretty comfortably in a TCW arc.

to call it a mash-up of 'Flash Gordon and Thunderbirds' is reductive and I don't even think very accurate. plus, as @Chen G. went to great and thorough lengths to cover, Flash Gordon is not nearly as large of an influence on Star Wars as Lucas and others would have you be lead to believe. for that matter, what Flash Gordon and Thunderbirds elements are even in TCW?

[Schilkeman 972]

2 hours ago, DarthDementous said:

to call it a mash-up of 'Flash Gordon and Thunderbirds' is reductive and I don't even think very accurate. plus, as @Chen G. went to great and thorough lengths to cover, Flash Gordon is not nearly as large of an influence on Star Wars as Lucas and others would have you be lead to believe.

This is a style vs content argument. I'm arguing that the style of Andor doesn't match the films. TCW had a whole arc on slavery, and another on galactic banking, and yet another that was basically Godzilla, and they all feel of a piece and of a style more or less in line with the pulpier aspects of the films. Filoni has cited Thunderbirds as being a source of influence on the animation style and character design, which is most apparent in the first couple of seasons before the characters were redesigned, and the animation made more fluid.

 

I'm not sure how anyone could watch all three serials of Flash Gordon and come away not seeing the stylistic similarities. Our good friend Chen is prone to analyzing films almost exclusively through literary sources and narrative, and greatly downplaying stylistic or non-script-based story elements. He is not on good terms with alternative narrative structures. His line of thinking seems to be that because George exaggerates some things, he must be exaggerating everything, which to me, shows a singular inability to textually analyze the art.

 

Additionally, he inflates the influence of Tolkien, doesn't seem to understand that Flash Gordon itself has A LOT of Burroughs to begin with, doesn't appear to know comic sources at all, and, most importantly, doesn't understand what George means when he says "tone poem." This is a dude who thinks Peter Jackson was better at Tolkien than Tolkien. He WILL NOT shut up about Braveheart and Wagner. I disagree with almost every word that spills out of his keyboard, but I would still listen to anything he has to say before I would spend another moment of my overdrawn life on a Red Letter Media review.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mArj6WvqzE

 

ps. Thank you Chen for being my punching bag to dunk on RLM. I have nothing against you personally, just all of the stuff you say.

 

[DarthDementous 1,060]

32 minutes ago, Schilkeman said:

This is a style vs content argument. I'm arguing that the style of Andor doesn't match the films. TCW had a whole arc on slavery, and another on galactic banking, and yet another that was basically Godzilla, and they all feel of a piece and of a style more or less in line with the pulpier aspects of the films. Filoni has cited Thunderbirds as being a source of influence on the animation style and character design, which is most apparent in the first couple of seasons before the characters were redesigned, and the animation made more fluid.

 

I'm not sure how anyone could watch all three serials of Flash Gordon and come away not seeing the stylistic similarities. Our good friend Chen is prone to analyzing films almost exclusively through literary sources and narrative, and greatly downplaying stylistic or non-script-based story elements, or alternative narrative structures. He over exaggerates the influence of Tolkien, doesn't seem to understand that Flash Gordon itself has A LOT of Burroughs to begin with, doesn't appear to know comic sources at all, and, most importantly, doesn't understand what George means when he says "tone poem." This is a dude who thinks Peter Jackson was better at Tolkien than Tolkien. I disagree with almost every word that spills out of his keyboard, but I would still listen to anything he has to say before I would spend another moment of my overdrawn life on a Red Letter Media review.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mArj6WvqzE

 

I have watched that full Rick Worley video before (both parts) and it is gobbledegook. as tempting as it is to pull the same lazy trick of writing you off because you're a fan of his, I will point out that none of what he says there applies to their Andor review which I assume you haven't watched. for one, the Plinkett reviews are the opinions of Mike Stoklasa, whereas the Andor re:view features both Mike Stoklasa and Rich Evans who don't see completely eye to eye on the show, and it's an unscripted discussion as opposed to an edited video series that came out ~15 years ago at this point

when you brought up Thunderbirds I assumed that was going to be relevant to the 'feeling of Star Wars' in general but that seems to just be specific to the animation style of this one show and doesn't relate to the movies, so I don't get the relevance

that consistent appeal to pulpiness is actually not a good thing in TCW. the arcs that want to explore the more serious and dramatic aspects of the war like the Umbara arc suffer heavily because characters like Pong Krell instead of exploring a more nuanced view on how some of the Jedi regarded Clones and the question of whether they were legitimate life or basically genetic tools, the pulp machine kicks in and makes him an unequivocally evil dark Jedi who was actually working for Dooku the whole time and his actions were one-note sabotage. I am so very thankful something like this does not happen in Andor as it would weaken the storytelling significantly.

'the style of Andor doesn't match the films' again assumes the films all have this one homogenous style when stylistically the Original Trilogy and the Prequels are miles apart. even A New Hope to Empire Strikes Back is quite stylistically different, owing to a change in directors. that's then clearly not what makes something Star Wars or not.

[Chen G. 3,975]

52 minutes ago, Schilkeman said:

I'm not sure how anyone could watch all three serials of Flash Gordon and come away not seeing the stylistic similarities. Our good friend Chen is prone to analyzing films almost exclusively through literary sources and narrative, and greatly downplaying stylistic or non-script-based story elements. He greatly over exaggerates the influence of Tolkien, doesn't seem to understand that Flash Gordon itself has A LOT of Burroughs to begin with, doesn't appear to know comic sources at all, and, most importantly, doesn't understand what George means when he says "tone poem."

 

Now, that's not a fair accusation. I've gone through a lot of comics that Lucas seems to have been through: as far as I can tell, his research STARTED with the Weird Worlds comic-strip, which adapted several Burroughs stories, and only then got into the actual Burroughs' paperbacks. Later on, he and his artists also looked into some recent Flash Gordon strips, works by Moebius and others. And he was certainly inspired by the works of people who illustrated many of these pulp works, including Frank Frazetta, Kelly Kae Freas, John Schoenherr.

 

Furthermore, Lucas had a particular way of working where he drew on literary sources, but processed them through movies: so Dune led him to thinking in terms of Lawrence of Arabia and Metropolis, Galactic Patrol led him to thinking in terms of James Bond and 2001, Princess of Mars got him thinking of The Searchers, The Stainless Steel Rat got him thinking of Casablanca, Tolkien made him think of Disney films, et cetera...

 

Flash Gordon has obvious similarities to Star Wars, and certainly a primary source for Lucas, especially the third serial, Flash Gordon Conquers the Universe. But, as I'm sure you'll agree, the relationship is less one of the specifics. Look at the main characters: Flash, Dale and Zarkov. A simple-minded person could say "Well, they're just Luke, Leia and Ben." But anyone who watched the serials would know that's absolutely false equivalency. Lucas is influenced by Flash Gordon, but he by no means rips-off Flash Gordon.

 

That's not to say Flash Gordon isn't a crucial, primary source for Lucas, from the initial instigation to pursue the project, to its name "Star Wars" (Lucas would have known Flash Gordon as "Space Soldiers"), to the whole basic vernacular of rayguns (although in Lucas' film they look more like vintage pistols) and landspeeders (Luke's is straight out a then-recent Gordon strip) to the basic concept of a rebellion against a tyrannical emperor, and some of the (more minor) environments in the sweep of the films like Cloud City and the Gungan city.

 

 What's more, the ramshackled look and the basic approach of metaphorically taking scraps from other movies and books and hitching them together are from Flash Gordon moreso than any other space opera property.  Another hugely important influence of Flash, which is of the essence for JWFan, is the score: the idea of doing a symphonic score and many of the specific choices of the temp-track, which obviously sent Williams down certain avenues, comes from Flash Gordon.

[Schilkeman 972]

54 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

Furthermore, Lucas had a particular way of working where he drew on literary sources, but processed them through movies

I think that's backward. I think George saw movies he liked and went looking for their literary (or other) source material. I can't imagine a world where read Dune before seeing Lawrence of Arabia. Same with Burroughs and Flash Gordon. I could be wrong, and there's no way I know of to be sure short of asking him, but he came at Star Wars visually first, and narratively second.

 

54 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

Flash Gordon has obvious similarities to Star Wars, and certainly a primary source for Lucas, especially the third serial, Flash Gordon Conquers the Universe. But, as I'm sure you'll agree, the relationship is less one of the specifics. Look at the main characters: Flash, Dale and Zarkov. A simple-minded person could say "Well, they're just Luke, Leia and Ben." But anyone who watched the serials would know that's absolutely false equivalency. Lucas is influenced by Flash Gordon, but he by no means rips-off Flash Gordon.

Way to restate my point and make it sound like your idea. Again, this is a style vs content argument. But in the case of Lucas, style often is the content. Read Carl Barks. George's framing and visual narrative is very similar to Barks's paneling.

 

55 minutes ago, DarthDementous said:

'the style of Andor doesn't match the films' again assumes the films all have this one homogenous style when stylistically the Original Trilogy and the Prequels are miles apart. even A New Hope to Empire Strikes Back is quite stylistically different, owing to a change in directors. that's then clearly not what makes something Star Wars or not.

The style differences between SW and ESB are a bit overblown. The lighting is the most obvious, as is Kershner's preference for blocking over framing, his (in my opinion) clumsy shot geometry, and his less rhythmic sense of editing. But the acting and dialog is not at all dissimilar, and the production design is right in line with the other films. It's slower, and in the sub mediant minor, but it's the same symphony.

 

I've also never bought this PT vs OT difference. Especially with the special edition, I think they fit quite nicely. George was an improvisor, and it took him a couple of takes to get a solo to his liking, but he got it there in the end.

 

55 minutes ago, DarthDementous said:

that consistent appeal to pulpiness is actually not a good thing in TCW.

I disagree, let's just leave it at that.

[Chen G. 3,975]

5 minutes ago, Schilkeman said:

I can't imagine a world where read Dune before seeing Lawrence of Arabia. Same with Burroughs and Flash Gordon.

 

I think so too. I see no reason to believe Lucas was aware of these works before circa 1972. But I do also think that, in terms of Star Wars, he was probably reading  Dune, bit-by-bit, and thought "Oh, Fremen! They're like Bedouin" and that immediately led him back to Lawrence of Arabia and so the entrance of the Sith warrior (not yet Darth Vader) in his rough draft is not unlike Sharif Ali's entrance as the Masturah well, and the first designs for Vader follow suit: even in the finished film, you could say the black figure entering against an entire field of white is an extreme abstraction of Ali's entrance, which he had in mind since 1974.

[Schilkeman 972]

1 hour ago, DarthDementous said:

I have watched that full Rick Worley video before (both parts) and it is gobbledegook.

This is a different video than the "gobbledegook" (how?) video. I suffered the TPM review exactly once, and it was so mind-numbingly stupid I wrote them off for life. Maybe they've learned some actual film theory, or gained basic plot and textural analysis skills in the intervening years. I leave that for others to decide.

 

I watched Andor. It's a fine show. I get what it's going for, but for me a taco is not a sandwich, and Andor is not Star Wars. I wrote off most of the old EU for the same reason, as much as I liked some of it. I don't buy this "a property can be anything" approach to ip. It's a downright pandemic in the video game industry. Ronald D Moore will stare you straight in the face and say DS9 is the best Star Trek because it isn't Star Trek. Tony Gilroy has said similar things about Andor. This mentality has served to make Star Wars less and less unique, in my opinion.

[Chen G. 3,975]

I do think Andor is at the very fringes of what could concievably be considered Star Wars. I mean, remove the few mentions of Palpatine and touch up only a few of the visuals, and it could have been any space opera.

 

I think that's part of the issue when a series becomes so big that you get a prequel (Andor) to a spinoff (Rogue One) of a sequel (Revenge of the Sith) to a prequel (The Phantom Menace) of a sequel (The Empire Strikes Back). That's my only "conceptual" beef with Andor, which apart from that and from some fragmented storytelling, I like very, very much.

[DarthDementous 1,060]

1 hour ago, Schilkeman said:

The style differences between SW and ESB are a bit overblown. The lighting is the most obvious, as is Kershner's preference for blocking over framing, his (in my opinion) clumsy shot geometry, and his less rhythmic sense of editing. But the acting and dialog is not at all dissimilar, and the production design is right in line with the other films. It's slower, and in the sub mediant minor, but it's the same symphony.

 

I've also never bought this PT vs OT difference. Especially with the special edition, I think they fit quite nicely. George was an improvisor, and it took him a couple of takes to get a solo to his liking, but he got it there in the end.

that actually helps makes the argument of the stylistic difference between the PT and the OT because George had to go back and modify the original films in order to update them to his modern sensibilities which very clearly changed. clear example of that is the shot in the ESB special edition where Leia is walking back and forth in front of a window and the camera is doing a slow digital zoom-in which is a very common shot in the Prequels. it's also very jarring stylistically in a film with a completely different directing style.

 

 

1 hour ago, Schilkeman said:

This is a different video than the "gobbledegook" (how?) video. I suffered the TPM review exactly once, and it was so mind-numbingly stupid I wrote them off for life. Maybe they've learned some actual film theory, or gained basic plot and textural analysis skills in the intervening years. I leave that for others to decide.

 

I watched Andor. It's a fine show. I get what it's going for, but for me a taco is not a sandwich, and Andor is not Star Wars. I wrote off most of the old EU for the same reason, as much as I liked some of it. I don't buy this "a property can be anything" approach to ip. It's a downright pandemic in the video game industry. Ronald D Moore will stare you straight in the face and say DS9 is the best Star Trek because it isn't Star Trek. Tony Gilroy has said similar things about Andor. This mentality has served to make Star Wars less and less unique, in my opinion.

it's not a different video. it's a segment from the 'How To Watch Star Wars' monstrosity that I suffered through with some friends. it's gobbledegook because it goes off on these bizarre tangents like the Bon Jovi one (I think that went for 30 minutes?) and assumes that you're on the same page as him of what makes good film-making. so you end up in an endless montage of pointing out film references (some of which are a huge stretch) with the implication that by virtue of Lucas making all these references, even when it's to the detriment of the sensibility of the Star Wars such as the terribly convoluted Attack of The Clones Padme assassination plot, it is good because it has showed he has watched a bunch of films - something that I think Rick Worley genuinely believes about himself.

the TPM review again was made by one member of RLM, 15 years ago in a completely different format from the Andor review which features two members. to write it off based on that is bizarre, and stop saying 'they' when the Plinkett reviews were almost entirely one person whereas RLM is made up of multiple people who don't all see eye to eye. it's such a convenient narrative that gets peddled by the anti-RLM brigade that avoids them having to engage with the nuance of anything about the content outside of the Plinkett reviews

I doubt that Tony Gilroy has said that 'Star Wars can be anything', but feel to prove me wrong if you've got a quote from his you'd like to share

when it comes down to it, the science fiction aspect of Star Wars is just as valid as the fantasy element, and the beauty of the EU and expanded material in general is that it doesn't have to appeal to everyone. you can enjoy the shows that play up the fantasy element (and are unfortunately significantly worse in construction, not because of the dialling up of fantasy but because of every other aspect of the production) and not be personally interested in the ones that play up the science fiction element - they are both Star Wars though. Andor isn't just the sci-fi aspect of Star Wars either, it's the political aspect and also the ramifications of tyranny and the nature of revolution - all of which can be found in the Original Trilogy, just dialled up to 11 here as the main focus instead of the backdrop. exactly what TCW does, minus the pulp that actively harms the kind of story being told
 

[Chen G. 3,975]

15 minutes ago, DarthDementous said:

that actually helps makes the argument of the stylistic difference between the PT and the OT because George had to go back and modify the original films in order to update them to his modern sensibilities which very clearly changed.

 

I think to treat these things in trilogies - as Lucas would doubtlessly want us to - is wrong. In lumping these films up that way, a lot of the nuance in terms of the merits and demerits of the individual entries, is lost.

 

And, again unlike Herr Schilkeman, I personally think the stylistic incongruity between Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back is a huge, gaping abyss. To me, the feeling of the films could hardly be more different if they tried. It furthers my case that these films are better seen as six entries, rather than as two trilogies, AND your point that Star Wars and the elusive Star Wars "feeling" is effectively redefined with each passing entry, certainly within the "Lucas" canon.

[Schilkeman 972]

53 minutes ago, DarthDementous said:

it's gobbledegook because it goes off on these bizarre tangents like the Bon Jovi one (I think that went for 30 minutes?)

Do you mean Dylan? I mean, why is there a 30 minute football game in the middle of M.A.S.H.? Sorry you couldn’t follow it.

[Tallguy 3,411]

On 05/04/2024 at 2:43 AM, Schilkeman said:

with a strong emphasis on visual storytelling, not just as set dressing for dialog.

 

Mr. Villeneuve? Is that you?

 

Star Wars (the film) may not have the most sophisticated dialog and it has become more than fashionable to bash the writing. But the back and forth patter of the first two movies was always my favorite part.

 

I do think Star Wars can be very flexible. I've come to realize that my favorite component of Star Wars is the Galactic Civil War and that particular set of good guys and bad guys. Even when I was a kid the Jedi sections of the two sequels were my least favorite parts. Looking back I like them even less because they completely consume the hero of the first movie and essentially move him to his own films separate from the rest of the cast. (Making The Last Jedi a rather logical extension when you think about it.)

 

TotE looks super interesting to me. It feels like with the last few projects that Filoni is trying to connect all the dots. "What happened after this? What did this character do after that?" I'll be very interested to see how this show uses Vader. My favorite Vader outside of Star Wars and Empire is in Rebels. I want to see these people doing their JOBS.

[Schilkeman 972]

4 hours ago, DarthDementous said:

I doubt that Tony Gilroy has said that 'Star Wars can be anything', but feel to prove me wrong if you've got a quote from his you'd like to share

Gilroy is on the record saying is not a fan of Star Wars and that he wanted to create something more "real and explanatory."

Here's an example.

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2022/09/andor-star-wars

[Yavar Moradi 2,614]

I skimmed that article. I don't see anything like Gilroy "on the record saying he is not a fan of Star Wars", and it also doesn't include your "real and explanatory" phrase. So what in the article are you saying backs up your claim?

 

But hell, even if Gilroy wasn't really a fan of Star Wars before, that's not necessarily a detriment (in fact it can be an asset) -- just look at Nicholas Meyer's contributions to the Star Trek films, as a self-described "not a fan" of Star Trek.

 

I'm a lifelong fan of Star Wars and Andor is some of my favorite Star Wars. It leans into the political aspect that intrigued me in the original film and which I wanted to know more about. An aspect that Lucas himself was apparently wanting to dig into more, as evidence by his approach to the prequel trilogy... only that was plotted and scripted terribly, whereas Andor does it right.

 

Yavar

[Faleel 5,382]

1 hour ago, Yavar Moradi said:

I skimmed that article. I don't see anything like Gilroy "on the record saying he is not a fan of Star Wars", and it also doesn't include your "real and explanatory" phrase. So what in the article are you saying backs up your claim?

 

But hell, even if Gilroy wasn't really a fan of Star Wars before, that's not necessarily a detriment (in fact it can be an asset) -- just look at Nicholas Meyer's contributions to the Star Trek films, as a self-described "not a fan" of Star Trek.

[Yavar Moradi 2,614]

Okay, but that's not from the article.

 

Even in this out-of-context clip, it's clear that it's not that Gilroy hated Star Wars; he just wasn't a fan. (Apparently he hadn't even seen the original?) But it's telling that near the end of this clip, he says Rogue One is "a Battle of Britain movie"... and, well... the original Star Wars (which Rogue One was designed to lead into) was certainly influenced by Battle of Britain!

 

Also, the top-liked comments on that video are very interesting.  

 

Yavar

[Faleel 5,382]

29 minutes ago, Yavar Moradi said:

Even in this out-of-context clip, it's clear that it's not that Gilroy hated Star Wars; he just wasn't a fan.

 

Imagine if it had been this:

 

"I don't like Jerry Goldsmith, well it's not that I don't  like Jerry Goldsmith, I just have never been interested in him EVER."

 

"Would you work with Jerry Goldsmith?"

 

"No I don't/wouldn't like him/it, he/it doesn't/wouldn't appeal to me."

[Yavar Moradi 2,614]

To me it's exactly the same situation as Nicholas Meyer and Star Trek. (In what way is it different to you?)

It's not a case of someone actively HATING an IP and then being given the reins to it.

 

Yavar

[Chen G. 3,975]

12 hours ago, Schilkeman said:

ps. Thank you Chen for being my punching bag to dunk on RLM. I have nothing against you personally, just all of the stuff you say.

 

Forgot to respond to this, but no offence taken here. I enjoy the discussion and its good to have opposition to one's thesis. 

[Faleel 5,382]

10 minutes ago, Yavar Moradi said:

To me it's exactly the same situation as Nicholas Meyer and Star Trek. (In what way is it different to you?)

It's not a case of someone actively HATING an IP and then being given the reins to it.

 

Yavar

5 hours ago, Schilkeman said:

Gilroy is on the record saying is not a fan of Star Wars

 

10 hours ago, Schilkeman said:

Ronald D Moore will stare you straight in the face and say DS9 is the best Star Trek because it isn't Star Trek. Tony Gilroy has said similar things about Andor.

So you are arguing against something that was never really brought up in the original discussion.

 

I was just saying he is on the third tier of interest.

[Tallguy 3,411]

Good thing Tales of the Empire (that's this thread, right?) is Filoni and not Gilroy. Filoni is a FAN. He's forgotten more about Star Wars than we'll ever know. And it will probably feature some sort of wolf.

[Faleel 5,382]

Just now, Tallguy said:

Good thing Tales of the Empire (that's this thread, right?) is Filoni and not Gilroy. Filoni is a FAN. He's forgotten more about Star Wars than we'll ever know. And it will probably feature some sort of wolf.

Do you think Filoni knows that Duel of the Fates is actually just the TPM end credits?

[DarthDementous 1,060]

as @Yavar Moradipointed out, yes that article linked doesn't back up any claim made by @Schilkeman and I actually remember reading that interview in preparation for the series and feeling a glow of hope because of how much Star Wars had been caught in the glut of self-reference and how inaccessible it had become

the snippet from his Rogue One interview I don't think says anything we didn't already know, but given this was well before Andor was even conceived of I don't think it's a very up to date perspective for Gilroy, especially since the nature of his involvement in that project is very different from being the idea progenitor and showrunner of Andor

Yavar brought up Star Trek, but to bring up an example closer to home, Chris Avellone the lead narrative designer of KOTOR 2 which is one of the most critically claimed Star Wars stories ever, was on record saying how he wasn't really a fan of Star Wars and had gripes with it. despite this, he did his due diligence and dived into the expanded material and in the process fell in love with the series, whilst also grounding his ability to critique long-accepted facets of the Star Wars universe in the story such as the Force

it would not surprise me in the least to learn that in the process of diving into this universe, Gilroy has actually found things to appreciate about Star Wars that he didn't before. he strikes me in the vein of Irvin Kershner, director of ESB, who if you listen to him talk about the film it's clear he's not bogged down in the lore but is far more interested at the character drama at the heart of the piece and that's where his interest lies instead. something far more important from a film-making standpoint than knowing and being a database for lore factoids, I have to say. that's the job of other people in the production like the Lucasfilm Story Group anyway, and they did a very good job because there's a lot of deep cut references and no contradictions at all that I could tell

[Tallguy 3,411]

Now... now eventually you do plan to have TALES OF THE EMPIRE in your Tales of the Empire thread?

[Schilkeman 972]

Glad to see I'm making friends here.

2 hours ago, DarthDementous said:

Chris Avellone the lead narrative designer of KOTOR 2 which is one of the most critically claimed Star Wars stories ever, was on record saying how he wasn't really a fan of Star Wars and had gripes with it. despite this, he did his due diligence and dived into the expanded material and in the process fell in love with the series, whilst also grounding his ability to critique long-accepted facets of the Star Wars universe in the story such as the Force

Don't even get me fucking started on KOTOR II. Actually KOTOR I for than matter. Grey Jedi aren't a thing. I get why they're there as a game mechanic, but they aren't a thing.

 

2 hours ago, Tallguy said:

Now... now eventually you do plan to have TALES OF THE EMPIRE in your Tales of the Empire thread?

To be fair, the show isn't out yet, so we just get to spin our wheels for another month, and speculate about how Disney couldn't possibly mess it up again, could they?

 

5 hours ago, Yavar Moradi said:

To me it's exactly the same situation as Nicholas Meyer and Star Trek. (In what way is it different to you?)

Star Trek II is a dumb fucking movie. I mean, I love it (actually, I might just love young Kirstie Alley), but it's dumb, in a way the best Star Trek is not. Genesis is dumb. Spock's fake-out death is dumb. Khan himself is dumb. Not that the show couldn't be dumb as shit sometimes, but we usually recognize it as such.

 

I agree with Roddenberry that the overt military tone of the film is off-putting, that the emphasis on exploring and human advancement is put on hold so Kirk can play space wars, and I don't like how it assumes that it is, in fact, the first Star Trek movie. Don't look too close back there, nothing to see, that's just the shattered remains of V'ger, and the Star Trek that could have been. I am, however, a big fan of TNG, and the best Star Trek movie, First Contact.

 

5 hours ago, Faleel said:

So you are arguing against something that was never really brought up in the original discussion.

I don't even know what the original discussion was. I was replying to Yavar's take on Andor, and it went on from there. But to elaborate, similar is not the same. Just as "not a fan," isn't the same as "hate." My point was that sometimes very talented and creative people get the reins to something they don't care for or fully understand, and think they can make it better. My ultimate point, if I have one, is that Star Wars was fine as it was, and I would really like to see Tony Gilroy make his own soft science fiction show that says the things he wants to say, without bending Star Wars to his will. Moore has gotten many chances to tell stories his way, in, in my opinion, a fairly descending order of quality. Nothing needs to go on forever, and I posit that we would be better off if they didn't. That's all.

 

10 hours ago, Yavar Moradi said:

I don't see anything like Gilroy "on the record saying he is not a fan of Star Wars"

https://sffgazette.com/sci-fi/star_wars/andor-showrunner-tony-gilroy-admits-hes-not-a-huge-star-wars-fan-a1956

[Tallguy 3,411]

31 minutes ago, Schilkeman said:

I agree with Roddenberry that the overt military tone of the film is off-putting

 

I know fans hated Balance of Terror, Errand of Mercy, and The Doomsday Machine. TWOK was so military that the turning point of the plot was when Kirk did NOT take a military stance to an undeclared Federation ship.

 

But they did fire phasers. As they did in many Roddenberry approved episodes of Star Trek.

 

31 minutes ago, Schilkeman said:

how Disney couldn't possibly mess it up again, could they?

 

Other than Resistance what has Disney messed up with animated Star Wars? Speaking for myself Rebels is my third favorite Star Wars thing ever. Bad Batch has gotten a very good reception. And the Final Season of The Clone Wars was so good I keep thinking I like Revenge of the Sith. (I really don't. It's so terrible.)

 

People still generally love Mandalorian and Ahsoka got at least an OK reception. Boba Fett and Kenobi are the two big misses.

[Schilkeman 972]

8 minutes ago, Tallguy said:

Other than Resistance

Agree

 

8 minutes ago, Tallguy said:

Rebels is my third favorite Star Wars thing ever

Disagree

 

8 minutes ago, Tallguy said:

And the Final Season of The Clone Wars was so good

Hard disagree

 

8 minutes ago, Tallguy said:

People still generally love Mandalorian and Ahsoka

Didn't care for either of them. Only made it one episode into Bad Batch, Obi-Wan and Boba Fett.

 

8 minutes ago, Tallguy said:

TWOK was so military that the turning point of the plot was when Kirk did NOT take a military stance to an undeclared Federation ship

There is definitely a military vs civilian dichotomy set up by the plot with the scientists worried that the "military" will take the Genesis project from them. That would not happen in the show.

[Tallguy 3,411]

7 hours ago, Schilkeman said:

Didn't care for either of them. Only made it one episode into Bad Batch, Obi-Wan and Boba Fett.

 

Nope. There's nothing here for you then.

 

7 hours ago, Schilkeman said:

There is definitely a military vs civilian dichotomy set up by the plot with the scientists worried that the "military" will take the Genesis project from them. That would not happen in the show.

 

There is ONE guy and the leader of the project says "I cannot and will not subscribe to your interpretation of these events." And she's right.

[Yavar Moradi 2,614]

15 hours ago, Schilkeman said:

Star Trek II is a dumb fucking movie.

 

Well... that's certainly a take you won't find much company on.

 

15 hours ago, Schilkeman said:

I mean, I love it (actually, I might just love young Kirstie Alley), but it's dumb, in a way the best Star Trek is not.

 

I think you must just love young Kirstie Alley, because your diatribe against it (while completely failing to even explain why it's "dumb" according to you) really doesn't make you out to be a fan. And @Tallguy quite effectively pointed out that you really weren't paying much attention to the movie.

 

15 hours ago, Schilkeman said:

Genesis is dumb.

 

Uh... WHY? Terraforming is a thing in sci-fi. What if there was a device that could terraform an entire planet super-fast, but the consequences were that it would also destroy any pre-existing life on that planet? That is an *interesting* sci-fi concept/conundrum. There's nothing dumb about it.

 

15 hours ago, Schilkeman said:

Spock's fake-out death is dumb.

 

Well... you're especially dumb for saying this, because of course your issue is with Star Trek III! Nicholas Meyer, writer and director of the film, absolutely 100% intended Spock's death to be permanent, and was very upset when Paramount decided to back out of that. I agree that (as much as I do enjoy Nimoy's presence as Spock in the remaining Trek films), dramatically that was a huge mistake, and Star Trek II should have been allowed to have the powerful ending for the character than Meyer (and Nimoy himself, originally) intended!

 

15 hours ago, Schilkeman said:

Khan himself is dumb. Not that the show couldn't be dumb as shit sometimes, but we usually recognize it as such.

 

I'm more sympathetic to this, even though you didn't explain why. But it actually took me YEARS to come around to appreciating Khan in the film. Not that Montalban doesn't give a good performance, and the Ahab connections kinda make sense. But I still rolled my eyes at the way Khan and his people were depicted.

 

15 hours ago, Schilkeman said:

I agree with Roddenberry that the overt military tone of the film is off-putting, that the emphasis on exploring and human advancement is put on hold so Kirk can play space wars, and I don't like how it assumes that it is, in fact, the first Star Trek movie. Don't look too close back there, nothing to see, that's just the shattered remains of V'ger, and the Star Trek that could have been. I am, however, a big fan of TNG, and the best Star Trek movie, First Contact.

 

Jesus Christ are you inconsistent. You lament "the shattered remains of V'ger and the Star Trek that could have been" (hey, I'm a big fan of TMP too, and I do think it and the much-maligned Star Trek V actually best encapsulate Roddenberry's stated ethos of Trek) and then in the very next sentence you extoll FIRST CONTACT as "the best Star Trek movie"??? 

 

Like... WHAT? As "a big fan of TNG", you'll know that overall that series was far more cerebral than its predecessor, which far more often descended into silly action/adventure. And yet you champion the big dumb let's-turn-Picard-into-a-violent-action-hero movie? 

 

The let's-ignore-Picard's-established-attitudes-about-the-Borg movie? Because we need to copy The Wrath of Khan's Ahab thing and apply it to the captain? You decry how militaristic Wrath of Khan is, but hold First Contact as the BEST Trek, when it begins with the very definition of Big Dumb Space Battle, and then turns into an Aliens wannabe where all of our cerebral TNG crew pick up GIANT GUNS and go around shooting f'ing SPACE ZOMBIES who used to be their friends and colleagues? You think Gene Roddenberry would have approved of THIS movie? LOL. And yeah, there's a story about the first contact with Vulcans mixed in there somewhere... a lot of dumb mixed in with that too, to be perfectly frank. First Contact is easily the most overrated Star Trek film of all time by some margin, probably because after the sloppy Generations people were desperate for a win, and it LOOKED like a movie and appealed to general "I'm not really a Star Trek fan" audiences with its Big Dumb Action.

 

I honestly don't know how to reconcile the inconsistency of you considering this the best Trek but criticizing Wrath of Khan for going against the ideals of Trek. I guess it must just be nostalgia, or something.

 

On 08/04/2024 at 10:15 AM, Schilkeman said:

Gilroy is on the record saying is not a fan of Star Wars and that he wanted to create something more "real and explanatory."

Here's an example.

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2022/09/andor-star-wars

On 08/04/2024 at 10:38 AM, Yavar Moradi said:

I skimmed that article. I don't see anything like Gilroy "on the record saying he is not a fan of Star Wars", and it also doesn't include your "real and explanatory" phrase. So what in the article are you saying backs up your claim?

15 hours ago, Schilkeman said:

https://sffgazette.com/sci-fi/star_wars/andor-showrunner-tony-gilroy-admits-hes-not-a-huge-star-wars-fan-a1956

 

You conveniently left out the portions of my earlier post, which I have restored for proper context and put in bold. LATER finding things with Gilroy stating he wasn't a Star Wars fan doesn't negate the fact that I skimmed your original article example and could find NO such statements in it. But nice try!

 

Yavar