-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Star Wars: In Production [Rumors/SPOILERS for All Films Past, Present, & Future]
- Thread starter inm8num2
- Start date
Bobby Roberts
Banned
I remember a photo or two showing some vegetation & brush.
So basically it's supposed to be closer to Planet New Mexico as opposed to Planet Tunisia. But who really knows. I remember hearing people say that Yavin was absolutely NOT in this movie, and now today it appears it's in?
A "painted desert" type of landscape could be neat. There's some really beautiful desert in the New Mexico/Arizona area.
Messypandas
Member
Ha I made a mock-up of something like that a while ago, interesting news http://fc03.deviantart.net/fs70/f/2014/258/c/c/star_wars_episode_7_poster_by_messypandas-d7z9m1b.png
Bobby Roberts
Banned
I think it's weird to watch a movie hoping people are going to get angry about it. The movie should generate your sense of enjoyment, not the prospect of angering its fanbase.
It's a weird sentiment to share, I feel. "I hope they put something in the movie that will make people who watch the movie all angry" as opposed to "I hope I like the movie."
Hahahaha
Hahaha, of course I want the movie to be good above all else. But fanboy rage is also enjoyable to me. Not legit grievances, but petty shit like a gungan appearing in the background of one scene. I think it would be hilarious given the history of the series and peoples' reactions would only make it funnier.
I hate the prequels, don't put that evil shit on me.
Seems like a weird sentiment some PT fans have to "get back" at PT haters somehow.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
What a waste of schadenfreude.
I don't anticipate this movie being any good regardless, so I gotta take what I can get. Don't tell me you wouldn't laugh if Jar Jar showed up for half a second and everyone in theater collectively groaned.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
Why would I? I don't get it.
I'm telling you, I think it's weird to want to watch a movie I don't think is going to be good, solely on the off-chance there might be something specifically bad in it that could potentially piss off a hypothetical group of people to the point I might one day, in the future, laugh at their possible anger.
That's weird, to me. I'd rather watch the movie for what it is and hope that it entertains me based on its merits. That's essentially the whole point of my being in the theater in the first place.
Lynd7
Member
I'd hope that JJ wouldn't just reuse things to pander to the OT audience. How could he find that interesting? The OT stuff should not really have been the main focus, hopefully the new characters take over during this movie and become the main stars.
Also, do you think that with how JJ is setting up the look and creation of this film, will that have to be applied by the following directors of 8/9? I hope so, I'd want them to be consistent in how they were shot and put together.
Also, do you think that with how JJ is setting up the look and creation of this film, will that have to be applied by the following directors of 8/9? I hope so, I'd want them to be consistent in how they were shot and put together.
I don't think JJ intends to pander. He's going to make sure that Ep. VII has enough connections to the previous films, but everything so far suggests that the team is breaking from the molds of what a SW movie should be.
That's why I love things like the floating hand after the opening crawl. Out with tradition. These will be new SW movies in every sense of that concept.
That's why I love things like the floating hand after the opening crawl. Out with tradition. These will be new SW movies in every sense of that concept.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
Again, the terms "Fanservice" and "pander" seem to inherently suggest that doing things people might like is automatically a negative aspect regarding the films potential.
I don't get that. "Fanservice" is why any sequel to ANYTHING exists. The difference between "pandering" and "referencing" is there, but it seems to get fudged quite a bit depending on whether or not you buy into the idea that using notable elements of the fictional universe you're inheriting is automatically a bad thing.
I don't think "Star Trek" was a pander-fest. If it was, it would have been dry and sterile, just the way people percieved the existing fanbase to have enjoyed their Star Trek. That he nodded to recognizable elements in a reboot isn't necessarily "pandering," I don't think.
Usually these complaints tend to be the critical equivalent of the guy at pub quiz groaning because the early questions are "too easy."
I don't get that. "Fanservice" is why any sequel to ANYTHING exists. The difference between "pandering" and "referencing" is there, but it seems to get fudged quite a bit depending on whether or not you buy into the idea that using notable elements of the fictional universe you're inheriting is automatically a bad thing.
I don't think "Star Trek" was a pander-fest. If it was, it would have been dry and sterile, just the way people percieved the existing fanbase to have enjoyed their Star Trek. That he nodded to recognizable elements in a reboot isn't necessarily "pandering," I don't think.
Usually these complaints tend to be the critical equivalent of the guy at pub quiz groaning because the early questions are "too easy."
Tatsumaki Senpuukyaku!
Member
What purpose did doing the death scene from Wrath of Khan almost verbatim with Kirk and Spock switched with Spock yelling KHAN serve other than to pander.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
Pander to who? The audience he's doing that for doesn't give a shit about Wrath of Khan, so it's not pandering at that point. The other people (i.e. old Trek fans) who DO give a shit about Wrath of Khan are going to dislike it on the face of it. How is that "pandering" by any definition?
That said - at least JJ's usage of the "KHAN" scream makes some sort of storytelling sense as opposed to the Wrath of Khan usage, which is not only a) popular because laughable acting on Shatner's part made it a meme but b) stupid because Kirk knows he's getting off the planet when he begins the conversation.
You don't get it. Where did you get the idea that the only reason I would see Episode VII is to make fun of people? I'm not paying ten dollars for the off-chance that JJ might try to piss people off. I want the movie to be good, but I don't expect that it will be. My first post was pretty tongue-in-cheek to begin with, and I've continued to reiterate that I don't think it would be funny if they actually fucked up the movie. That said, I will laugh if JJ goes out of his way to throw in something like a Jar Jar cameo, and I will laugh when people throw a fit about it. Maybe it's weird to you that I'm not going into this movie with a stick up my ass about it, but I don't really care.
Tatsumaki Senpuukyaku!
Member
I donno ...there are obviously a bunch of cynical internet dudes who were going to hate that reference, but I don't think every die hard start trek fan is a cynical internet dude. When I saw that movie in theaters people were applauding that line.
I agree that the original usage was dumb. I remember thinking "why did Shatner scream when he knew he was getting off" when I first saw it (which was after years of having the Khan line hyped".
I still say it's pandering though. The only reason that scene happened was because it happened in an old Star Trek movie (and is probably the most famous scene in Star Trek history) and he wanted people's reaction to be "Cool he's doing the Khan scene!" which to me is pandering.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
I know I don't get it. I said I don't get it twice before you just told me I didn't get it
And I got the idea that you want to see Episode VII to make fun of people from your posts. Specifically the ones where you said you want to see Episode VII in the hopes you can make fun of people for the things that happen in it.
There's also this specific line
Which insinuates that the possibility you'll get to make fun of people after the movie is over is one of the main reasons you're going, because you don't expect the movie to be good in and of itself.
I don't think I'm off-base here or anything, am I? I don't get you, and I explained why I don't get you. Apparently you don't get you either, after reading the explanation.
Considering the way in which it was done, and the purpose the scene served in this movie as opposed to Wrath of Khan, I don't think his intent was to get people to say "Cool he's doing the Khan scene!" but rather, to attempt to improve on the Khan scene thematically (which he didn't) - It's no different than what he did on the previous movie on a larger scale: Take somewhat recognizable touchstones from the previous iteration, and repurpose them for a completely different audience. That's not pandering. If it was pandering, the completely different audience wouldn't even be taken into account. He'd be too busy jerking off the old audience.
Sometimes, when people complain about fanservice, what they're really doing is complaining that someone else is being jerked off instead of them.
I just realized something - Von Sydow's nonsensical rants which mention elements from the prequels might be JJ's way of writing off the PT as the imaginations of a crazy old man.
I kid, I kid. In all seriousness the PT will probably be most felt in recollections of Vader and the Emperor's rule, along with the fallen Jedi Order. Other than a few specifics here and there, it doesn't seem like there will be as many references to the PT as there will be to the OT.
BlueDogAnchorite
Member
Same here. I feel that they shouldn't ignore the Prequels, since they are a big part of the whole Saga. I hope they still use some Prequel elements. Not only elements from the OT. I also hope they do something new.
Secret Fawful
Member
Weirdly enough, I'm watching the new trilogy for either reason. If it's bad, I win. If it's good, I win.
RedAssedApe
Banned
How is this different from Vader.
Considering the way in which it was done, and the purpose the scene served in this movie as opposed to Wrath of Khan, I don't think his intent was to get people to say "Cool he's doing the Khan scene!" but rather, to attempt to improve on the Khan scene thematically (which he didn't) - It's no different than what he did on the previous movie on a larger scale: Take somewhat recognizable touchstones from the previous iteration, and repurpose them for a completely different audience. That's not pandering. If it was pandering, the completely different audience wouldn't even be taken into account. He'd be too busy jerking off the old audience.
Sometimes, when people complain about fanservice, what they're really doing is complaining that someone else is being jerked off instead of them.
I think you're giving too much credit to Orci and Kurtzman's script. Things like old Spock talking about Wrath of Khan for some reason, tribbles, and KHAAAAAAN are just incompetent attempts to pander. You're right that the pandering doesn't make sense, considering the attempt to also bring in a new audience, but that's because they're bad writers who don't understand why "Trekkies" wouldn't like their facile attempts to appeal to them.
MisterHero
Super Member
Into Darkness's pandering was flat out awful. Kirk's death was really bad drama. The writing was poor. The moment was unearned. You are blaming WoK for a scene [or a series of scenes] that ID executed poorly.
In all fairness to JJ, showing Kirk beat the Kobayashi Maru was an excellent homage. He should've left it at that.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
I don't. I'm not the biggest fan of theirs (or much of a fan at all) but the film itself makes it obvious what their intent was so far as the storytelling goes. I'd have to essentially ignore the characterization and the arcs as presented to me (which is hard, since they're reworking stuff they already did in the first movie) in order to substitute a narrative where Orci, Kurtzman, and Abrams are all "YEAH, NOW WE'LL GET 'EM! THOSE OLD FANS WON'T BE ABLE TO RESIST IT!"
Again - I don't think that they're trying to pander to old trekkies, or even appease them. Orci might have been trying to appease himself, maybe, but any writer will do that, really. But I still have a hard time believing they were really trying to pull in the old fans with any of those moves.
If they cared about the old fans to that extent, they wouldn't have ever rebooted. The old fans were seen as a dead end.
MisterHero said:
So it's pandering until you like it, then it's an homage
I'm not "blaming" Wrath of Khan for anything. Dunno where you're getting that.
It's really not weird. We're in an age where the sub-culture w/ all the emotions tied into it are just as much a part of the product as the actual film. It's a package of a film, a reception, an (inevitable) fan-created controversy/drama and a multitude of forces for discussions to be held years after its release, and all of this makes up the overall entertainment.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
And I think that's the weird part.
I've been, in one form or another part of any number of subcultures, in some cases leading communities, in others just contributing to them. I've always thought that part was weird, (even as I was doing it in my younger days) the part where the people who like a thing don't just like a thing, they have to elevate their liking of the thing to an importance level EQUAL to the thing itself.
It's one of the weird, destructive ways fans try to assert a sense of "ownership" over a thing they can't ever own. It's step one on the road to weaponizing a fandom.
it's weird.
Ladies and gentlemen...Lawrence Kasdan is trying to top his No, I am your father moment with this crazy twist.
MAJOR POTENTIAL SPOILER about Luke Skywalker....read at your own risk:
http://makingstarwars.net/2014/10/huge-rumor-star-wars-episode-viis-father-sized-moment/
MAJOR POTENTIAL SPOILER about Luke Skywalker....read at your own risk:
http://makingstarwars.net/2014/10/huge-rumor-star-wars-episode-viis-father-sized-moment/
Cross-Section
Member
That's certainly a craaaaaazy twist... :\
Kind of
Kind of
undermines the climax of ROTJ if true.
I hear you, but I don't really agree with some of the terms you used, like "sense of ownership" or "destructive," or "weaponizing." The reality is much more dull.
There was no way to avoid that, although this is quite the extreme. They wouldn't have a sequel trilogy without some Sith like element to it.
I ain't reading that, but I hope it isn't "Luke has gone to the dark side" or something. All I want is Mark Hamill all sage and with a beard spewing Jedi wisdom.
TheKaeptain
Banned
This is a spoiler thread so I don't think we have to use spoilers. Luke being the bad guy just sounds bad. It undermines RTOJ and means would have to get a lot of backstory in the second and third movie.
GentlemanCrow
Member
I don't buy that.
*Reads the new rumors.*
Couldn't have said it better myself. This sounds utterly terrible.
Couldn't have said it better myself. This sounds utterly terrible.
TheKaeptain
Banned
^Yeah that's what I was thinking. Ridley's character arc will involve a fake out where she just uses the bad guy to find Luke.
Devin on twitter was talking to a another critic and said "I can't believe he ran that." Hopefully he clarifies what he meant.
Devin on twitter was talking to a another critic and said "I can't believe he ran that." Hopefully he clarifies what he meant.
MisterHero
Super Member
^^^^^^^ the rumors don't sound that bad. It doesn't say anything about the characters' motivations.
Bolded: You're criticizing WoK (Shatner's performance, him hamming it up for Khan) to make ID's choices seem reasonable (that's what I interpreted anyways). There are lots of people that are willing to disagree on that.
Back to the OT, JJ definitely knows how to get fans going. The art direction and sets are halfway there. I can't decide whether which has more pressure to please the fans: Star Wars 7, or STXIII: the 50th anniversary..
Both are pandering, but the Kobayashi Maru scene was the sweet sweet kind. The scene that illustrated Kirk's personality well. The audience I saw it with at an advance screening loved it. They loved Spock Prime. Every Khan-related thing ID tried to do was banal in comparison.So it's pandering until you like it, then it's an homage
I'm not "blaming" Wrath of Khan for anything. Dunno where you're getting that.
Bolded: You're criticizing WoK (Shatner's performance, him hamming it up for Khan) to make ID's choices seem reasonable (that's what I interpreted anyways). There are lots of people that are willing to disagree on that.
Back to the OT, JJ definitely knows how to get fans going. The art direction and sets are halfway there. I can't decide whether which has more pressure to please the fans: Star Wars 7, or STXIII: the 50th anniversary..
He talked further about that, claiming it was too big of a spoiler for him to post. He didn't imply or call it false. He said "this is the kind of stuff I won't run. It's WAY too spoilery. It's dickish." Yeah, it fits what Devin is hearing too. He would have said otherwise.
It's also entirely possible that the crew is purposely throwing out red herrings to prevent real leaks.
Jables Swan
Member
I hope it's bullshit. I don't like it.