Star wars episode 7: Coming soon?

Yeah I certainly don't want a reboot. And I'd prefer they didn't continue the saga. Just a new story with new characters in the Star Wars universe...I definitely don't want to see an old Han Solo, as that would just be sad. An old Jedi Luke at the most.
 
A lot of people seem to want Joss Whedon for this. As has been mentioned already, he is already commited to Avengers 2 and the timeframe of that movie and Episode 7 conflict perfectly. This is probably for the best though as I don't think Joss has the right tone for Star Wars (at least not the Star Wars I love)

Others seem to be suggesting Alfonso Cuaron, perhaps due to what he did with Harry Potter. I do believe Alfonso is one of the most talented filmmakers working today (Children of Men is one of my favorite films), but frankly I don't really see him wanting to tackle Star Wars, especially not a Disney production of it. I doubt Disney would be willing to go dark enough for his aesthetic.

I think Guillermo Del Toro would be a really interesting choice, but once again I doubt Disney would be willing to do down the dark path he would most likely want the film to take. Plus he does not have the financial track record to back up handing the biggest IP in the world.

Peter Jackson is out due to post production on the Hobbit films.

This doesn't really leave very many good options if you ask me. People have mentioned JJ Abrahams, and that is an interesting choice, but I don't think it would happen (and lets' be honest, do we really want Damon Lindelof writing this film?) for many reasons, mainly Star Trek 2. Joseph Kosinski would be a really interesting choice, and he did make Tron Legacy with Disney, but I don't think he has the financial record to be chosen. Brad Bird is a really interesting option, but he's already in pre-production for his next film.

Ultimately, for me, this leaves Gore Verbinksi. Disney loves him, he's made a crap ton of money for them. The Pirates movies shows he can handle the big productions and does have some talent (especially the first one), and perhaps most importantly in this equation, he is AVAILABLE. Lone Ranger will be finishing post very soon and he has nothing else announced. The time frame fits, he has a fantastic box office record, and Disney loves him. I'm not saying he is the best option for creating the best film, because frankly he's not. There are many more talented directors out there. But I believe he has the most things going for him.


EDIT: Just did some more reading. It would seem Brad Bird's next film is in a bit of limbo or at least in the very early pre stages, so I think I will now add him to right behind Verbinski at the top of the list. MI4 was fantastic and he has a history with Disney as well. Expect this battle to come down to Verbinski and Bird.
 
Last edited:
Barry_Green said:
Expectations were pretty high when they took over Pixar, too, and that seems to have turned out all right.
Click to expand...
Pixar came with proven IP, a winning formula and a winning team already in place. In this deal Disney got proven, if a little worn, IP, no team and no formula. Much more work for Disney this time around than just letting John Lasseter & Co. keep doing what they do best.
 
jghenderson said:
People have mentioned JJ Abrahams, and that is an interesting choice, but I don't think it would happen (and lets' be honest, do we really want Damon Lindelof writing this film?) for many reasons, mainly Star Trek 2. Joseph Kosinski would be a really interesting choice, and he did make Tron Legacy with Disney, but I don't think he has the financial record to be chosen. Brad Bird is a really interesting option, but he's already in pre-production for his next film.

EDIT: Just did some more reading. It would seem Brad Bird's next film is in a bit of limbo or at least in the very early pre stages, so I think I will now add him to right behind Verbinski at the top of the list. MI4 was fantastic and he has a history with Disney as well. Expect this battle to come down to Verbinski and Bird.
Click to expand...

I have peered into the future to bring you a future Variety article headline: DISNEY GIVES STAR WARS THE BIRD!

Barry_Green said:
The writer for "Lost" is apparently already clamoring for a chance to write a Star Wars film.
Click to expand...

My theory...

Damon Lindelof and Brad Bird are already set-up as the writer/director team for Star Wars Episode 7.

The reason being that there is this spec script project called 1952 that Lindelof sold to Disney recently.

http://www.firstshowing.net/2012/brad-bird-set-to-direct-damon-lindelofs-1952-not-1906-for-disney/


Some specifics from the article that might point to my theory:

"Brad Bird and fan-favorite film writer Damon Lindelof are teaming up for a new project at Disney. Bird, coming off of his first live-action with Mission: Impossible Ghost Protocol, is set to direct the mysterious large scale sci-fi project 1952. Whether that's just a codename or an actual year related to the story, we're not yet sure, but the project "has multi-platform aspirations" meaning Disney wants it for theme parks, retail stores and theaters. It'll no doubt be a "big tentpole" movie, and with these two storytellers leading the way, it is definitely something to watch for."
Click to expand...

So in addition to the new Star Wars films, we have theme park and retail store aspirations? I don't know about you, but this sounds like it could be the next phase of Star Wars via the Disney model.

"Now we know that Brad Bird is definitely on-board to direct, but other than that, still no plot details. Anyone? It sounds like Disney has something on their hands that could be huge, and they're making sure to build it from the ground up properly, with the right talent top to bottom. I just wish we knew any extra details about what it was actually about."
Click to expand...

My theory is that 1952 is a codename for episode 7, 8, and 9. Just as Blue Harvest was used as a working title to throw the media off when Return of the Jedi was in production.

Why this mysterious project known as 1952 though? Because the title alone seems to refer to the year 1952, just as titles like Kubrick's landmark of science fiction 2001: A Space Odyssey or Wong Kar Wai's romantic sci-fi piece 2046 refer to years in which the films take place. What happened in 1952 then that makes this seem logical? What I think is the obvious event is an incident where supposedly some UFOs *buzzed the tower* if you will over Washington D.C. This is precisely the type of project that someone like Damon Lindelof would write (retro, sci-fi, conspiracy theory-laden, and infused with the American mythology of the UFO phenomenon). 1952, if it is actually about this supposed UFO fly-by of Washington DC, sounds interesting. The thing is, they needed a really good cover story to cover up Damon Lindelof and Brad Bird's involvement with Star Wars. I think this is not unlike the Blue Harvest ruse, which was very thorough in covering up the production of Return of the Jedi.

Another factor is that Mark Hamill was born on September 25th of 1951. I'm guessing that since this story will probably have Luke as the Obi-Wan type of mentor as many are suggesting, that it was a cute little Lindelofian trick to throw people by having the fake title be of a year so close to both Luke Skywalker's birthday and the implication of a possible movie connection to the Washington D.C. UFO fly-by. Lindelof and Disney figured it would be a better ruse to switch the year of this fictitious film from 1951 to 1952, so as to steer speculation towards the UFO fly-by concept.

Again, they're already setting up a whole trilogy that kicks off in 2015, which unless Star Wars episode 7 is a holiday theatrical release ala Bond or The Hobbit, that leaves only about two-and-a-half years for Disney and the new Kathleen Kennedy captained Lucasfilm to get a script finished to a polished state, put into production, posted (in 3D), and released. For all we know, it is likely that the script has been written and polished and Brad Bird is directing while Lindelof is on as a producer now. Pre-production could very well be underway if we look at this current time table of about two years from now as a release date. We're at the end of October 2012. Let's say Star Wars episode 7 is going to be released in the middle of summer, say mid-July. That leaves only two more months for 2012 (minus a couple weeks for all the holiday loss of productivity). Then another 28-30 months if they were to release in mid-July 2015 (gotta leave time for prints and marketing and director and writer/producer hyping and interviews). Even if Disney throws money at this, it is not something they will take lightly, as getting episode 7 drastically wrong will be a huge problem for them and future plans to grow Star Wars into an even bigger intellectual property.

So I'd say this also could explain how Disney already has the basics worked out in terms of already being able to announce episodes 7-9 and more Star Wars films after those every two to three years apart. I wager that Lindelof sat down with George Lucas months ago after his Prometheus work ended, and hashed out the basic story structure for ep. 7-9 and for some of the ideas for stuff that comes after. Just like he sat alongside Ridley Scott and rewrote John Spaihts' Alien Engineers* script, which became the film Prometheus.




*Alien Engineers was one of the working titles of the initial scripts before Prometheus morphed from being specifically an Alien prequel into the space jockey centric film that tried to move away from the classic H.R. Giger creature as the centerpiece.
 
That's a very interesting theory Nektonic. It makes a lot of sense that Disney would already have the ground work for the films before they announced. And if it is true, I will say I am excited. Brad Bird is one of the greatest animation directors of our time, and MI4 showed he could handle live action with just as much virtuosity. I think I would actually prefer Bird over Verbinski.

I'm not too thrilled of the idea of Lindelof writing the script, however. I love Lost as much as the next guy, but I find his actual writing to be average. Even in Prometheus, i found the writing to be the weakest part. In addition, i've never seen anything to suggest to me that Lindelof possesses the sense of humor to really pull a Star Wars film off. That being said, he is the hottest writer in sci-fi right now, so it makes a lot of sense that he would get the gig.
 
David Jimerson said:
Who's "we," though?
Click to expand...
Well, the "we" I was thinking of was everyone who got amped when they first heard that there was going to be a new trilogy at all. I'm sure there were more than a few of us, before George dropped his pants and crapped out Episode 1 all over our movie screens.

:D
 
Brad Bird, yes...Damon Lindelof...please let's hope not. And your secret is safe with me lv_426.
 
I am so excited about this. Truthfully, after episodes 1-3, I was hoping to never have another Star Wars movie again. But as long as Lucas is not writing or directing I think I'm willing to give it another shot. But for those who are saying he won't be writing, don't you think it's a bit delusional? I'm sure within the fine prints of that Disney deal, he still has say over what ideas are put on that script. Maybe the deal doesn't give him the option to direct but certainly doesn't leave him off writing. Frankly, I'll be more okay to have him be part of the writing then directing, but it's almost impossible to not have him be part of the writing, I mean he is George Lucas and if it's a Star Wars script, you better believe he will be involved with the writing.

But with that being said, I am so excited about this, the potential to make some great films from the extended universe is amazing. I would love to see a movie on the Bounty Hunters (specifically Boba Fett), but he may not be a big enough character for Disney to portray a whole movie around. Oh and how about those Imperial Guards (The Red Ones) who guarded the Emporer, those guys were always such a cool mystery.

But those are the kind of stories I would like to see, not the same old characters of Luke, Obi Wan and Vader. But of course I'm only the minority, I'm sure Disney is looking at the bigger aka money making characters. Either way, let’s GET IT ON!!!.
 
Nektonic said:
What happened in 1952 then that makes this seem logical?
Click to expand...

Clearly a remake of the 1952 classic...

lf
 
For all those who are conjecturing 'what ifs....'...

Here's a 'what if'...

"Battlestar Galactica"... a TV show that originated with ABC... you know that network that is now owned by... Disney... and there's a Marvel comic series... Marvel that little known comic book publisher... owned by... Disney... (for another $4B... is there something magic about $4B these days...).
 
j1clark@ucsd.edu said:
For all those who are conjecturing 'what ifs....'...

Here's a 'what if'...

"Battlestar Galactica"... a TV show that originated with ABC... you know that network that is now owned by... Disney... and there's a Marvel comic series... Marvel that little known comic book publisher... owned by... Disney... (for another $4B... is there something magic about $4B these days...).
Click to expand...

Don't know where you're going with this -- BSG is owned by NBC/Universal.
 
I'm curious as to how Disney will treat the "Expanded Universe".

Will episodes 7 - 9 weaves these tales or will they take place generations later?

Will we get to see Luke and Mara Jade hook up or Chewbacca's noble sacrifice?
 
jghenderson said:
A lot of people seem to want Joss Whedon for this. As has been mentioned already, he is already commited to Avengers 2 and the timeframe of that movie and Episode 7 conflict perfectly. This is probably for the best though as I don't think Joss has the right tone for Star Wars (at least not the Star Wars I love)
Click to expand...

I can't disagree more. Perhaps we grew up with Star Wars at different times (I was introduced when it was digitally remastered), but I feel that Joss Whedon, of all popular directors/writers in the industry fits the paradigm of what Star Wars is the most. Avengers may be an example of this, however for me the evidence lies within Firefly. Ignoring the obvious influences (Mal=Han, Serenity=Millenium Falcon, etc...) and the western/sci-fi cross-over genre similarities, it comes down to the writing. The feel, characters, humor, drama and over all adventure of the firefly series works so well to compliment Star Wars. Also Star Wars is a lot about the group dynamic, of which Whedon understands fully. Not to mention I could just see Whedon writing clever lines for maverick characters like Han Solo as if second nature. The movie Serenity's space battles were also very clever and fun, and shows he knows that realm as well.

Firefly is a beast of it's own, and it isn't exactly Star Wars. However because of their similarities, I feel Joss Whedon would make that jump between worlds almost seamlessly.

He's not available, however I hope he can maybe do at least one of the movies in the Trilogy.

I'm glad for this piece of news for one main reason. The prequels somewhat turned me off of Star Wars, of which was my love for a long long time. I'm hoping some new films will restore this love and bring me back to this world.


What can they do for the sequals though? Star Wars is about a young boy becoming a hero, and the fight between good vs bad. George tried to bring this into the prequals (not successfully , and so what does that leave for the sequels? Who is the hero that grows from a boy (or girl)? What is the evil?

Perhaps the answer lies in Han Solo's children. However there's already a whole expanded universe on them.
 
Last edited:
Barry_Green said:
Well, the "we" I was thinking of was everyone who got amped when they first heard that there was going to be a new trilogy at all. I'm sure there were more than a few of us, before George dropped his pants and crapped out Episode 1 all over our movie screens.

:D
Click to expand...

OK, but why would that group be owed something, but even more avid fans aren't?

There are two reasons to make more Star Wars.

1) To please fans.

2) To make money.

If the reason to do it is 1, as you said it was, then to say "so what?" to a group of fans seems strange.

If 2, then Eps I-III were enormously successful, and even something of that caliber would be acceptable.

Granted, the ideal should be somewhere in between, but how do you draw the line? Who are the "real" people who need to be pleased here, and why them and not others?
 
David Jimerson said:
OK, but why would that group be owed something, but even more avid fans aren't?
Click to expand...
Didn't say anyone was "owed" anything, just said that there was obviously a pretty big group of us who were amped when we heard that more Star Wars films were coming, and we were disappointed in what we got. And that we now would have further reason for optimism in knowing that the guy who was specifically responsible for the lousy films, is now out of the picture, making room for perhaps someone to do better.

There are two reasons to make more Star Wars.

1) To please fans.

2) To make money.
Click to expand...
Well, that's grossly oversimplifying it, don't you think? There are many, many reasons to make more films. One of the first reasons would be that someone who really cares, wants to create something that fulfills a strong inner creative desire. That may not be Disney's motivation, but it may be the filmmaker's motivation -- I doubt that Peter Jackson set out with the goal to specifically please LOTR fans or to make himself a boatload of money, although both of those were side effects. I think he wanted to make LOTR. I mean, if I was to undertake Ender's Game, I wouldn't be doing it specifically to please fans, although, sure, I'd hope that they'd be pleased by what I did, but setting out to try to meet someone else's expectations is a pretty sure way to guarantee a sterile failure that accomplishes nobody's goals.

Disney's motivations may be initially to make money, sure, but not absolutely necessarily as such a one-track goal -- they may have grand plans for theme parks and toy spinoffs and cartoon series, and making new films gives them a way to broaden the universe and therefore the sandbox they get to work within. Which could theoretically mean that even if the films were money-losers on their own (a so-called "loss leader") it might still make sense within their larger overall plan.

I would hope that whoever takes on the role of making the next trilogy, would do so for a love of the project, and not trying to chase fans' expectations or satisfying the corporate desire to make more ewoks.

If the reason to do it is 1, as you said it was, then to say "so what?" to a group of fans seems strange.
Click to expand...
Really? Let's warp back to 1976 then, and ask -- did George Lucas go around asking sci-fi fans what they wanted, run focus groups, poll who wanted what, calculate statistics, and then write a script and make a film around that? Or did he have a vision for what he wanted to do, which was make a sci-fi western serial space opera, and just go and do it, hell or high water, regardless of what the public told him? I think he made the film he wanted to make. And because it was honest, and sincere, the fans loved it.

Same thing with Apple. Who wanted an ipod? Who wanted an ipad? Steve Jobs set out to make the most "insanely great" thing he could think of, even though everyone said that it was crazy, who on earth would want to carry their entire music library around with them, the whole concept was inane, etc., and the ipad was ridiculed when it was first announced, the public in general (or at least the blogosphere) couldn't figure out who would want such a product. But Jobs knew what he wanted to build, and he built it, and because he held to that, both products were incredibly successful.

If 2, then Eps I-III were enormously successful, and even something of that caliber would be acceptable.
Click to expand...
Short term vs. long term. Eps I-III were financial smash hits, yes. But whereas Episode IV-VI are remembered fondly and lovingly thirty years after release, Eps I-III were despised and mocked within days of release. If IV-VI had never existed at all, and we were all introduced to Star Wars with Episode I -- do you think it would be the blockbuster towering cultural phenomenon that is Star Wars? I doubt it. If we had never heard of Luke and Leia and the Force and Han and the Millennium Falcon back in 1977, and the very first we ever heard of Star Wars was Jar Jar and Naboo and Boss Nass -- I predict it would have burned in flames at the box office, right alongside John Carter of Mars.

Who are the "real" people who need to be pleased here, and why them and not others?
Click to expand...
That's easy -- me, because I'm the guy buying a ticket. :)

But to actually answer the question you're asking -- chasing the superfans is always a road to complete failure. Always has been, always will be. We learned that lesson 25 years ago in the video game business, as we made sequel after sequel trying to give "the fans" what "they want". And what we learned is, the most vocal of the fans were the ones who were the most into the products, and what they wanted was more more more -- more detail, more history, more technical, etc. Yet, they accounted for only a very tiny percentage of the overall game-playing universe. And giving them what they wanted, necessarily made the games more complex, more detailed, and inherently more difficult. Just what "the superfans" wanted. And therefore, made them unapproachable and unplayable for the masses. The more we tried to give "the fans" what "they" said they wanted, the more we strangled and killed off our own franchises.

So we quit doing that. We went back to making fun games with the emphasis on fun, and started racking up enormous successes and beloved franchises (sure, "C&C" is a little long in the tooth now, but it was one of the most popular series ever, and was dominant in its day, and there are still tons and tons of people who look back fondly on it.)
 
I didn't say you should "chase the superfans." I'm asking who the movie is being made for, and why.

What you wrote is kind of all over the map. It's somewhere between "make fans happy" and "make money" and "make whatever seems great to you and let the chips fall where they may."

Seems to me that Lucas thought he was doing the third thing; who's to say he was wrong for doing so, and on what basis?

It just seems strange to cite fan dissatisfaction for how awful the financially successful prequels were, and then have a "so what?" attitude toward fans at the prospect of their dissatisfaction with the upcoming sequels.
 
I don't think pleasing anyone is necessarily any studio's motivation to do anything. Enticing people to go out and buy a ticket is. Selling an entertaining world so fans and newbies alike will be enticed to go out and buy some tickets and toys is the general level game here. Making money and enticing people are one in the same, really. And I don't think studios weigh the reactions of superfans too heavily. It's certainly a vocal market but not necessarily a large one considering the overall potential gross.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top