Post by: Maggie Ann on April 14, 2019, 06:47:25 AM
Not the best SW trailer I've ever seen, but there were moments.
Post by: David VanDyke on April 14, 2019, 10:20:35 AM
Post by: dgcasey on April 14, 2019, 11:42:46 AM
Kind of like Captain Marvel walking in and saving the Avengers because, well, they just couldn't get it done without her.
Post by: Maggie Ann on April 14, 2019, 11:50:49 AM
Post by: Eric Thomson on April 14, 2019, 12:10:06 PM
Post by: Post-Doctorate D on April 14, 2019, 01:59:49 PM
I have to agree with a lot of the commentators on the web and Youtube, that the Star Wars story is dead. From what I gather in this trailer is that Disney thinks that Luke, Leia, Anikan and even Kylo are all just stepping stones to some new Skywalker (most likely Rey).
Or the Jedi Order is going to be replaced by a new Skywalker Order.
Post by: PJ Post on April 15, 2019, 01:49:25 AM
We filled up the theaters for Wonder Woman, repeatedly. Ripley is about as beloved as a SFF character can get. Alita was well reviewed by much of this same demographic, not to mention: Hermione, Trinity, Buffy, Furiosa, Sarah Connor, Rita (the Angel of Verdun) or…I don’t know - Leia! So, Dear Lucasfilm, it’s not me, it’s you.
The problem isn't strong female characters, the problem is cardboard cut-outs of virtue/agenda signaling stand-ins. Ripley is loved because of her vulnerabilities, not in spite of them. In the world of story we call this drama. Rey's untarnished perfection makes her a classic Mary Sue, which removes the drama and the whole point of the movie. We know everyone will love her the mostest, she'll master anything thrown at her in seconds, if not sooner - better than anyone ever has before - and she cannot be beaten in battle. (She whipped Luke, Snoke’s elite Praetorian Guards and Kylo - twice!) And if she does need something, the Force gives it to her because reasons.
She has no arc.
But at the end of the day, I think Star Wars could have survived all of the Mary Sues and even the propaganda horsesh*t, if Rian had only known how to make a movie, which he clearly does not: be it pacing, tone, focus or even the most basic understanding of the elements of story. This was the second Act of a trilogy. He was given a wide open canvas and yet, TLJ opened with a 'yo mama' joke combined with a dated cell phone commercial reference. This demonstrates a total lack of respect for the source material, as well as an openly disdainful disregard for how this movie fits into the broader Star Wars canon.
The fans loved loving Star Wars, and Rian and Disney f*cked that all up, so it's no wonder there are hard feelings. He basically gave lifelong fans the finger.
Disney betrayed them.
I don’t see how JJ can fix that.
Post by: Maggie Ann on April 15, 2019, 02:12:52 AM
I saw the original in 1977 in theaters and I was hooked, and no matter how much they have deviated from the spirit of Star Wars, sentimentality has me in its grip.
It's the same for me with the Harry Potter movies. The Fantastic Beasts movies are a sideways step away from the original, but still, it's the Potterverse and I will watch those movies.
Post by: German Translator on April 15, 2019, 02:47:34 AM
(https://imagesvc.timeincapp.com/v3/mm/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftimedotcom.files.wordpress.com%2F2019%2F04%2Fstar-wars-rise-of-skywalker-teaser-6.png&w=800&c=sc&poi=face&q=85)
Post by: Bill Hiatt on April 15, 2019, 03:23:53 AM
It's a larger version of the book-to-movie problem. Sometimes, the director or screenwriter or whoever simply has a different vision than the original author. Not necessarily worse. There are even rare cases where the movie is better (the original Carrie is better than the novel), and a larger number where it isn't really an adaptation of the book as much as a complete reimagining--but still good (Ready Player One, which differs considerably in detail but not in spirit). Then there are a lot that either fall short or are so bad they are actually an affront to the original (the Joffe Scarlet Letter makes anyone who's ever read the book cringe).
Of course, the Stars Wars material isn't an adaptation of a book, but it does suffer from the problem of several divergent visions that can't easily be reconciled. It would have been better if the later movies were actually set in a different universe with different characters rather than piggybacking on the original Star Wars material. Of course, no one ever does that because of commercial reasons, and we end up with severe cases of sequelitis, incoherent universes, inconsistent interpretation of those universes. I wonder how the later movies would have been received if they had stood on their own instead of being an addition to the Star Wars canon.
It's this same commercial spirit that causes remakes (called reboots these days) instead of development of more original material. Why do something new when you can beat something old to death? Hmmm... Is it time to reboot Spiderman again? We've only done it three times so far. It's not that all reboots are bad, but sometimes they feel like someone is taking a fundamentally different universe and pretending it's the same one to rake in more bucks.
This is also the cause of trying to tie movies together that have nothing to do with each other. For instance, Troll was fairly well-received, so someone had the bright idea of taking a completely unrelated movie called Goblins and renaming it Troll 2 prior to its release.
Yes, sadly Disney is not the only one responsible for cinematic atrocities. They are, in fact, surprisingly common. That said, I'll end with another Disney blooper in the name of extending a franchise: On Stranger Tides. Many people don't realize it's based on the Tim Powers novel of the same name. It's easy to see why, since the movie mutilates the source material into a Pirates of the Caribbean movie that even fans of the franchise have trouble liking. So, Star Wars fans, you aren't alone.
Post by: Post-Doctorate D on April 15, 2019, 05:56:51 AM
With Disney, they're just out to make money. And, as far as Star Wars is concerned, they don't seem to care about telling a story at all. And it's really kind of stunning when you consider that Marvel is also owned by Disney yet they've managed to tell a story over the course of their films. They had an overall plan; it was a flexible plan that allowed individual movies to tell a story and tell the best story they could which occasionally meant making changes to the overall plan rather than try to force something into a movie that just didn't work. That's not to say all the films have been perfect, but they had some sort of plan.
But with Star Wars, they apparently didn't do that. They knew they were creating a trilogy yet apparently did not plan any kind of story arc for the three films. They apparently just winged it.
And, sadly, it shows.
So many people, (and by people I mean lifelong dedicated fans), just don't care anymore. And that sucks. The Force Awakens was a straight up remake of New Hope, which made no sense given where the story ended with Return of the Jedi, but we were so hungry for a new Star Wars movie we kind of gave JJ a reluctant pass.
Not to mention that he basically remade A New Hope not just once but twice now.
Post by: Maggie Ann on April 15, 2019, 07:29:36 AM
Post by: TimothyEllis on April 15, 2019, 03:08:15 PM
My hope is in 10 years time, someone makes all 9 movies, in order, over 5 years, and redoes the whole thing in something which works, and is much better than the originals.
But this below is the real problem.
Post by: Bill Hiatt on April 16, 2019, 03:00:07 AM
Boy's adventure movies and female empowerment movies aren't mutually exclusive. It's possible to incorporate both elements and make them work together. It's too bad some developers apparently see them as a dichotomy.
As far as Timothy's suggestion of a Star Wars reboot, I think one is almost inevitable--if there is still a fandom left to cheer it on by the time someone gets around to doing it.
Post by: Bill Hiatt on April 16, 2019, 03:23:42 AM
Not to mention that he basically remade A New Hope not just once but twice now.I don't entirely doubt the premise in the video, but it's worth pointing out that a lot of these elements have very, very long histories, so that a case could be made for common source rather than direct copying. For example, the older wisdom figure training the young hero (Obi Wan-Luke, Pike-Kirk) could just as easily be Merlin-Arthur--or Dumbledore-Harry. That one is literally all over the place. So is an important person being kidnapped and having to be rescued by the hero. The "everyone goes home for tea and medals scene" reminds me of the coronation scene near the end of the first Narnia movie. In fact, the only one where the Star Trek-Star Wars link seems really glaring is the bar scene.
Post by: bardsandsages on April 16, 2019, 03:28:37 AM
Kind of like Captain Marvel walking in and saving the Avengers because, well, they just couldn't get it done without her.
Did you see the movie already? What is that assumption based on?
Post by: Maggie Ann on April 16, 2019, 03:30:52 AM
Here's the real issue with Mouse Wars (see the image). I dont care what anyone says, Star Wars went for 6 episodes. Then we got Mouse Wars.
My hope is in 10 years time, someone makes all 9 movies, in order, over 5 years, and redoes the whole thing in something which works, and is much better than the originals.
But this below is the real problem.
Speaking on behalf of this strong, independent woman, whatever KK's views, this is no more than a marketing ploy. It has nothing to do with female empowerment, just box office receipts. My take is that most women relate to Kylo Ren because he's a bad boy and not to Rey as a strong role-model.
Now Wonder Woman is an entirely different story. She was always my favorite along with Aquaman (haven't seen that movie yet). Okay, she's an Amazon, the very definition of a SIW, but most of all, she had very cool toys and great hair.
Post by: bardsandsages on April 16, 2019, 03:39:47 AM
But this below is the real problem.
Except Star Wars was NEVER a "boy's adventure" series. It was based on Campbell's The Hero's Journey. I mean, there are textbooks about this. It was never a "boy's adventure." It was originally designed to replicate mytho-poetic literature. Lucas point-blank said this time and time again. He deliberately set out to create a mythology.
The Last Jedi was a hot mess for a lot of reasons (bad editing, poor pacing, needless introduction of toy-friendly critters, too-stupid-to-live decisions made), but "female empowerment" is not the issue...unless you really think Star Wars is a male-only franchise that women not only don't enjoy, but have no legitimate reason to enjoy because it is a "boy's adventure." Jesus, anyone familiar with the expanded universe (before Disney killed it) knows that there were already plenty of strong female characters (Meetra Surik, Mara Jade, Bastila Shan, Jaina Solo...). So this notion of a powerful female force user isn't something that was pulled out of the aether. They have existed in the expanded universe literally for decades now.
I ain't gonna argue that Rey isn't a Mary Sue. She is. But that is a different problem from dismissing the entire thing as "female empowerment."
Post by: Bill Hiatt on April 16, 2019, 04:00:46 AM
It wasn't intended to be a boy's adventure series. But sometimes intent is partly subconscious. Even when I saw the first movie in theaters--I was comparatively young at the time--I was struck by the number of elements that seemed to be geared toward children. The almost comical alien figures, using a name like "wookie" for an alien race, the cuteness of Yoda, the truncation of Luke's grief for his lost family (which seemed to take about half a scene to disappear completely), the droid comic relief. I'm not saying any of those things are bad--but they aren't exactly Joseph Campbell, either. The content does come from Campbell, but the tone is something else entirely.But this below is the real problem.
Except Star Wars was NEVER a "boy's adventure" series. It was based on Campbell's The Hero's Journey. I mean, there are textbooks about this. It was never a "boy's adventure." It was originally designed to replicate mytho-poetic literature. Lucas point-blank said this time and time again. He deliberately set out to create a mythology.
The Last Jedi was a hot mess for a lot of reasons (bad editing, poor pacing, needless introduction of toy-friendly critters, too-stupid-to-live decisions made), but "female empowerment" is not the issue...unless you really think Star Wars is a male-only franchise that women not only don't enjoy, but have no legitimate reason to enjoy because it is a "boy's adventure." Jesus, anyone familiar with the expanded universe (before Disney killed it) knows that there were already plenty of strong female characters (Meetra Surik, Mara Jade, Bastila Shan, Jaina Solo...). So this notion of a powerful female force user isn't something that was pulled out of the aether. They have existed in the expanded universe literally for decades now.
I ain't gonna argue that Rey isn't a Mary Sue. She is. But that is a different problem from dismissing the entire thing as "female empowerment."
I never thought the original movies lacked for strong female characters, though certainly the cast was predominately male. I'm not as familiar with the expanded universe, though from what little I do know, it was a shame that Disney killed it. Movies developed from it would have cohered to the original movies far better than the Disney plot lines. Anyway, the Disney films have Rey and would have had Leila if not for Carrie Fisher's untimely demise, but there are still an awful lot of male characters. Having the potential savior be female is a departure from the original, but even in the original, Leila played a significant role (and was, after all, a sort of backup savior, as the "There is another" line attests). In other words, I think you have a good point about the female empowerment issue.
Post by: Post-Doctorate D on April 16, 2019, 04:33:40 AM
Han Solo knew Obi-Wan Kenobi for all of about an hour.
So Leia and Han get married, have a son and then name him after a guy neither one of them really knew.
By that reasoning, if they had a second son, they probably would have named him Greedo.
Post by: Post-Doctorate D on April 16, 2019, 04:41:00 AM
Not to mention that he basically remade A New Hope not just once but twice now.I don't entirely doubt the premise in the video, but it's worth pointing out that a lot of these elements have very, very long histories, so that a case could be made for common source rather than direct copying. For example, the older wisdom figure training the young hero (Obi Wan-Luke, Pike-Kirk) could just as easily be Merlin-Arthur--or Dumbledore-Harry. That one is literally all over the place. So is an important person being kidnapped and having to be rescued by the hero. The "everyone goes home for tea and medals scene" reminds me of the coronation scene near the end of the first Narnia movie. In fact, the only one where the Star Trek-Star Wars link seems really glaring is the bar scene.
That's true but a big planet destroying ship isn't an element of the Hero's Journey. :hehe
I recall a different video (which I could not find which is why I linked to the one I did) that showed a side-by-side comparison of shots from the two movies and their strong similarities.
But, yeah, the Hero's Journey is a template for a lot of movies. I don't remember the exact stats, but a screenwriting book I read suggested that something like nine out of ten blockbuster movies have followed that template.
I use it as a guide too sometimes. I used it as a guide for my current WIP which, incidentally, does not have a big planet destroying ship anywhere in it. grint
Post by: Bill Hiatt on April 16, 2019, 05:09:01 AM
I don't doubt that there is some dependence, but big, planet-destroying ships are not unknown in science fiction, either. Keeping in mind that the original Star Trek series aired almost a decade before the Star Wars movie, one could argue that Lucas got the idea for a big, planet-destroying ship from Star Trek. However, I'm sure if we looked around, we could find a lot of other similar devices in science fiction. Aside from planet-destroying ships, there are very definitely other kinds of doomsday devices with roughly the same effect.Not to mention that he basically remade A New Hope not just once but twice now.I don't entirely doubt the premise in the video, but it's worth pointing out that a lot of these elements have very, very long histories, so that a case could be made for common source rather than direct copying. For example, the older wisdom figure training the young hero (Obi Wan-Luke, Pike-Kirk) could just as easily be Merlin-Arthur--or Dumbledore-Harry. That one is literally all over the place. So is an important person being kidnapped and having to be rescued by the hero. The "everyone goes home for tea and medals scene" reminds me of the coronation scene near the end of the first Narnia movie. In fact, the only one where the Star Trek-Star Wars link seems really glaring is the bar scene.
That's true but a big planet destroying ship isn't an element of the Hero's Journey. :hehe
I recall a different video (which I could not find which is why I linked to the one I did) that showed a side-by-side comparison of shots from the two movies and their strong similarities.
But, yeah, the Hero's Journey is a template for a lot of movies. I don't remember the exact stats, but a screenwriting book I read suggested that something like nine out of ten blockbuster movies have followed that template.
I use it as a guide too sometimes. I used it as a guide for my current WIP which, incidentally, does not have a big planet destroying ship anywhere in it. grint
Post by: Edward M. Grant on April 16, 2019, 05:59:39 AM
The Star Wars saga ended with Return of the Jedi. The three so-called prequels were proof George Lucas has no talent and the Disney sequels proof Disney is not just evil but stupid.
Yeah, I stopped caring when I saw Phantom Menace. I know, I was warned, but I did it anyway. Stupid me.
The last one has been on Netflix for weeks, but I've felt no desire to watch it.
Post by: Edward M. Grant on April 16, 2019, 06:04:46 AM
Except Star Wars was NEVER a "boy's adventure" series.
I saw the original movie when it first came out. Number of girls in audience == roughly zero.
Now, that's not to say it didn't have decent female characters: we all liked Leia for being a princess but also being able to make sensible tactical decisions and shoot a blaster better than an Imperial Stormtrooper. But there's no doubt in my mind that the original movie was made for boys; every boy in my school wanted to see it as soon as it came out, and the girls were nowhere near as interested.
As for the later ones, I don't know. Empire Strikes Back felt like it was made for adults and Return of the Jedi like it was made for six-year-olds, probably both boys and girls given the cuddly toy merchandising.
Post by: Tom Wood on April 16, 2019, 06:18:04 AM
"George Lucas has acknowledged the heavy influence of The Hidden Fortress on Star Wars,[7] particularly in the technique of telling the story from the perspective of the film's lowliest characters, C-3PO and R2-D2.[8][9] Lucas's original plot outline for Star Wars also had a strong resemblance to the plot of The Hidden Fortress,[10] which would be reused for The Phantom Menace."
A big planet-destroying ship has nothing to do with the hero's journey as a direct requirement. The Death Star is a stand-in for the abyss that leads to the hero's metamorphosis. They even descend into the belly of the beast by dropping into the trash compactor. There, Luke is pulled under the water (symbol of transformation and rebirth) where he temporarily dies. When he emerges, he takes active command of the proceedings from there. Then risks all to be a true hero at the climax moment. The Death Star is just a sci-fi iteration of the same story beat.
Post by: Bill Hiatt on April 16, 2019, 06:38:52 AM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hidden_Fortress (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hidden_Fortress)"There is nothing new under the sun." Ecclesiastes
"George Lucas has acknowledged the heavy influence of The Hidden Fortress on Star Wars,[7] particularly in the technique of telling the story from the perspective of the film's lowliest characters, C-3PO and R2-D2.[8][9] Lucas's original plot outline for Star Wars also had a strong resemblance to the plot of The Hidden Fortress,[10] which would be reused for The Phantom Menace."
A big planet-destroying ship has nothing to do with the hero's journey as a direct requirement. The Death Star is a stand-in for the abyss that leads to the hero's metamorphosis. They even descend into the belly of the beast by dropping into the trash compactor. There, Luke is pulled under the water (symbol of transformation and rebirth) where he temporarily dies. When he emerges, he takes active command of the proceedings from there. Then risks all to be a true hero at the climax moment. The Death Star is just a sci-fi iteration of the same story beat.
I remember an old writing text I was looking at when I first thought about being a writer (during my junior high years). One of the most interesting pieces of advice was to read the Bible and the Homeric epics. The author claimed that every conceivable plot could be found in them. Though that may be something of an exaggeration, it probably isn't a big one.
Speaking of planet-destroying ships, one could also connect them to various apocalyptic materials. Many cultures have believed in the ultimate end of the world as they knew it--though not by planet-destroying technology.
Post by: bardsandsages on April 16, 2019, 06:50:33 AM
It wasn't intended to be a boy's adventure series. But sometimes intent is partly subconscious. Even when I saw the first movie in theaters--I was comparatively young at the time--I was struck by the number of elements that seemed to be geared toward children. The almost comical alien figures, using a name like "wookie" for an alien race, the cuteness of Yoda, the truncation of Luke's grief for his lost family (which seemed to take about half a scene to disappear completely), the droid comic relief. I'm not saying any of those things are bad--but they aren't exactly Joseph Campbell, either. The content does come from Campbell, but the tone is something else entirely.
Have you ever really studied mytho-poetic literature? There are some...well...comical figures in almost every culture. For example, meet the Kappa (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kappa_(folklore)#Defeating_the_kappa), a froglike creature that sucked a magical, not-actually-existant organ out of your anus, but was so fixated on politeness that if you bowed to it, it would bow back...causing the magical fluid in its head to spill out and leave it paralyzed. That is only one of the infinite comical creatures conjured up by the human psyche in the quest for myth. Myth and folklore are overrun with ridiculous, comical creatures and races. Why should "alien" races be any different?
Also keep in mind that, with the original trilogy, Lucas had to work with the special effects of the time. I doubt that was a willful attempt at childish comedy, but working with what he had.
Post by: Anarchist on April 16, 2019, 07:41:20 AM
Post by: PJ Post on April 16, 2019, 08:15:50 AM
Post by: dgcasey on April 16, 2019, 08:57:00 AM
As far as well developed female characters with agency go in Star Wars - Disney canon - JJ might have thought about centering the new trilogy around Ahsoka Tano. Lucasfilm had a sh*t-ton of options, but they chose to 'write to market' instead.
That's the same thing they're doing with the MCU. There are good choices in women to defeat Thanos without going all deus ex machina on the storyline. If Black Widow and Nebula were to team up and kill Thanos I would give a hearty fist pump and yell, "You go girls!" There is no one in the entire universe that wants to drive a dagger between his eyes more than Nebula.
But, what are we likely to get? Some all powerful woman that comes flying in at the last second and taps Thanos on the forehead and kills him instantly. I mean, this is a woman that can defeat entire fleets of space battleships with her bare hands, so kicking some big, purple guy's ass shouldn't be a problem for her.
It has nothing to do with disliking women in these roles or not. It's the fact that Captain Marvel has no skin in the game whatsoever. She hasn't suffered anything in the fight up to this point. We didn't see her sitting on the ground, grieving over the ashes of Bucky. She didn't stumble toward Groot as he turned to ash. She didn't cry over Vision's body and then turn to dust herself. She didn't stand on a foreign planet and watch his entire team turn to dust, including a 15-year-old kid that probably shouldn't have been there.
So, if she comes swooping in and saves the day without even breaking a sweat, the MCU is dead from this point forward. Might as well just disband the Avengers because anytime we get in trouble now, we'll just call Captain Marvel. We don't need anyone else.
And they are already doing this with Rey. She is becoming this all-powerful Jedi master without hardly any of the trials and tribulations the others have faced. She will cut through the First Order like a hot knife through butter and come out the other side without even messing up her makeup.
Star Wars, Star Trek and the MCU are toast.
Post by: dgcasey on April 16, 2019, 09:01:11 AM
The Star Wars saga ended with Return of the Jedi. The three so-called prequels were proof George Lucas has no talent and the Disney sequels proof Disney is not just evil but stupid.
Yeah, I stopped caring when I saw Phantom Menace. I know, I was warned, but I did it anyway. Stupid me.
The last one has been on Netflix for weeks, but I've felt no desire to watch it.
Well, you kind of have to watch all of them at least once. But, not like the ten to twenty times some of us did back in the 70s and 80s during the original run. We need to watch them at least once to be able to say intelligently where the whole series went wrong.
I will watch Captain Marvel when it comes out at Redbox, but I doubt I'll buy it, like I have almost every other MCU movie. From the reviews I've read and the trailers I've seen, it's nothing more than one long, boring "meh."
Post by: bardsandsages on April 16, 2019, 10:28:46 PM
That's the same thing they're doing with the MCU. There are good choices in women to defeat Thanos without going all deus ex machina on the storyline. If Black Widow and Nebula were to team up and kill Thanos I would give a hearty fist pump and yell, "You go girls!" There is no one in the entire universe that wants to drive a dagger between his eyes more than Nebula.
But, what are we likely to get? Some all powerful woman that comes flying in at the last second and taps Thanos on the forehead and kills him instantly. I mean, this is a woman that can defeat entire fleets of space battleships with her bare hands, so kicking some big, purple guy's ass shouldn't be a problem for her.
Again, what are you basing this assumption on? Dude, it isn't even ABOUT killing Thanos at this point. They have to "fix" what happened. Which means the Quantum Realm. Captain Marvel isn't here to just punch Thanos in the face. After 20+ movies, I have confidence in the team at the MCU to do this right. Thanos can be beat by Thor. You have to deal with the Infinity Stones. Which means you need a power that can counter them. Ergo, Captain Marvel (who is effectively an Infinity Stone in her own right). If you genuinely believe End Game is going to come down to "Captain Marvel punches Thanos in the face...the end" you haven't been paying attention for the last 21 movies. There is no plot reason for what you are claiming is going to happen because it runs counter to everything they have built over the last 21 movies.
Besides, everyone knows that to truly destroy Thanos, the only woman for the job is Squirrel Girl.
(https://static2.cbrimages.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Squirrel-Girl-vs-Thanos.jpg?q=50&fit=crop&w=738&dpr=1.5)
Post by: bardsandsages on April 16, 2019, 10:30:17 PM
I will watch Captain Marvel when it comes out at Redbox, but I doubt I'll buy it, like I have almost every other MCU movie. From the reviews I've read and the trailers I've seen, it's nothing more than one long, boring "meh."
Wait, wait, wait...to be clear...you haven't even SEEN Captain Marvel yet but you are talking all this smack about her?
:roll: :roll: :roll: :icon_rofl: :icon_rofl: :icon_rofl:
Post by: Bill Hiatt on April 17, 2019, 02:28:10 AM
Yes, I have studied mytho-poetic literature in some detail. Sure, there were comic figures in almost every culture, although some of them may not have been intended as comic by the societies that produced them. But they do tend to be related more closely to other aspects of myth besides the hero tradition. For instance, the Kappa is a trickster, and tricksters are more likely to be comic.
It wasn't intended to be a boy's adventure series. But sometimes intent is partly subconscious. Even when I saw the first movie in theaters--I was comparatively young at the time--I was struck by the number of elements that seemed to be geared toward children. The almost comical alien figures, using a name like "wookie" for an alien race, the cuteness of Yoda, the truncation of Luke's grief for his lost family (which seemed to take about half a scene to disappear completely), the droid comic relief. I'm not saying any of those things are bad--but they aren't exactly Joseph Campbell, either. The content does come from Campbell, but the tone is something else entirely.
Have you ever really studied mytho-poetic literature? There are some...well...comical figures in almost every culture. For example, meet the Kappa (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kappa_(folklore)#Defeating_the_kappa), a froglike creature that sucked a magical, not-actually-existant organ out of your anus, but was so fixated on politeness that if you bowed to it, it would bow back...causing the magical fluid in its head to spill out and leave it paralyzed. That is only one of the infinite comical creatures conjured up by the human psyche in the quest for myth. Myth and folklore are overrun with ridiculous, comical creatures and races. Why should "alien" races be any different?
Also keep in mind that, with the original trilogy, Lucas had to work with the special effects of the time. I doubt that was a willful attempt at childish comedy, but working with what he had.
However, later societies virtually always adapt earlier traditions to their own cultures, so the question isn't so much what the original society intended as how a later society or author interpreted it. Case in point: The Kevin Sorbo Hercules series. (I think the name was Hercules: The Legendary Journeys.) The Herakles of Greek myth was a heavy drinker, an epic fornicator, and someone who killed indiscriminately (though even the myths vary in how he is portrayed). In contrast, Sorbo's Hercules never drinks, never has sex outside of marriage, and never kills human beings. (The story in which Hera drives him insane so that he kills his own children is modified so that Hera does the killing directly.) And then there's the Disney cartoon Hercules, in which Hercules, rather than being the product of one of Zeus's adulterous relationships, is the son of Zeus and Hera. He's separated from them, and grow up among ordinary humans as an awkward teenager.
The adaptations above are so different that if the names were changed, people could not readily recognize them as the same story. I would argue that Lucas's situation is analogous. Yes, he is consciously following the idea of the hero's journey, but the characters are composites from various cultures rather than being adaptations of particular mythological figures. As such, it is Lucas who determines how the different components are mixed together. In particular, he determines the proportion of humorous material, which, however it might have played in earlier cultures, is more likely to appeal to children (or to our inner children) in our society. In other words, our modern cultural expectations are at least as important as the underlying myths, if not more so.
Nor is this kind of adaptation of originals somehow unique to modern society. It's been happening since the very beginning. Herakles was originally a more heroic figure. When the Dorians invaded Greece and claimed that their leaders were descended from Herakles, the native population responded by creating or adapting the myths to portray Herakles in a less favorable way. Odysseus is portrayed as noble in Homer, but later portrayals make him more and more deceitful and cowardly as time goes on. (The Romans, who thought themselves descended from the Trojans, encouraged this development.) When Josephus tried to present the Torah and other Jewish sacred works in a way that Romans would understand and appreciate, he frequently changed the story significantly. For example, Moses is originally portrayed as fleeing Egypt after killing an overseer who was abusing a Hebrew slave. In Josephus's version, Moses flees Egypt because he is so handsome and talented that everyone envies him and wants to kill him. Early Saxon converts to Christianity had a hard time figuring Jesus out, so when the Heliand (Saxon Gospel) was created, it portrayed Jesus as a war chief and the disciples as his sub chiefs.
Yes, Lucas was consciously drawing from myth--but he was influenced by contemporary culture as well, and that also provides insights into what he was trying to do.
Post by: Bill Hiatt on April 17, 2019, 02:29:37 AM
I'm going to be eagerly watching these movies to see which prophecies come to pass.I will watch Captain Marvel when it comes out at Redbox, but I doubt I'll buy it, like I have almost every other MCU movie. From the reviews I've read and the trailers I've seen, it's nothing more than one long, boring "meh."
Wait, wait, wait...to be clear...you haven't even SEEN Captain Marvel yet but you are talking all this smack about her?
:roll: :roll: :roll: :icon_rofl: :icon_rofl: :icon_rofl:
Post by: Edward M. Grant on April 17, 2019, 09:18:11 AM
As far as well developed female characters with agency go in Star Wars - Disney canon - JJ might have thought about centering the new trilogy around Ahsoka Tano. Lucasfilm had a sh*t-ton of options, but they chose to 'write to market' instead.
I don't see any evidence of 'write to market'. I don't know anyone in the real world who actually liked Han Solo Dies At The End (I can't even remember the official title of the movie), and few on the Internet. It was just dismal in every respect, and the only decent parts were the ones the original characters were in.
Rogue One was kind of OK, but still about a 4/10.
Post by: Bill Hiatt on April 17, 2019, 11:22:46 AM
Maybe they were writing to what they thought was the market. Maybe they were being self-indulgent and assuming they could get people to watch whatever they chose to put out with the Star Wars label on it.As far as well developed female characters with agency go in Star Wars - Disney canon - JJ might have thought about centering the new trilogy around Ahsoka Tano. Lucasfilm had a sh*t-ton of options, but they chose to 'write to market' instead.
I don't see any evidence of 'write to market'. I don't know anyone in the real world who actually liked Han Solo Dies At The End (I can't even remember the official title of the movie), and few on the Internet. It was just dismal in every respect, and the only decent parts were the ones the original characters were in.
Rogue One was kind of OK, but still about a 4/10.
Post by: bardsandsages on April 18, 2019, 12:34:37 AM
I don't see any evidence of 'write to market'. I don't know anyone in the real world who actually liked Han Solo Dies At The End (I can't even remember the official title of the movie), and few on the Internet. It was just dismal in every respect, and the only decent parts were the ones the original characters were in.
The Force Awakens was a competent movie that did what it needed to do. It wasn't great, but it wasn't bad. It needed to bridge the gap between the original trilogy and those whose first experience with Star Wars was the prequels. And it has been so long since there had been a SW movie that they probably felt they DID need to sort of rehash a lot because you can't assume everyone watching even KNOWS what is going on.
I also believe Harrison Ford sort of DEMANDED that they kill off Han, as he really didn't want to do any more of the movies. He actually thought Han should have died in the original trilogy.
Rogue One was the "we need to fill that huge plot hole that has been tormenting us for literally generations" movie. I actually enjoyed it, but I went in expecting a tragedy. Continuity wise, you sort of new how it had to end. It was just a matter of seeing how it would get there.
I feel a lot of the current trash talking about TFA and RO is based on the hatred of TLJ. TLJ was horrible. Not from "SJW" point, but from just horrible filmmaking and storytelling. Rian Johnson has zero respect for the source material and DIDN'T EVEN TRY to make any of it work within the continuity of the entire franchise. Johnson was more interested in making a "Rian Johnson" movie than a Star Wars movie. The backlash is what hurt Solo (which, though I didn't like the actor they chose for Han, was a good space western otherwise). If TFA had been decent, I don't think people would be going back and trashing the other movies as well. A lot of it is just venom over TLJ.
Post by: Bill Hiatt on April 18, 2019, 01:33:43 AM
There is a lot to be said for that perspective.I don't see any evidence of 'write to market'. I don't know anyone in the real world who actually liked Han Solo Dies At The End (I can't even remember the official title of the movie), and few on the Internet. It was just dismal in every respect, and the only decent parts were the ones the original characters were in.
The Force Awakens was a competent movie that did what it needed to do. It wasn't great, but it wasn't bad. It needed to bridge the gap between the original trilogy and those whose first experience with Star Wars was the prequels. And it has been so long since there had been a SW movie that they probably felt they DID need to sort of rehash a lot because you can't assume everyone watching even KNOWS what is going on.
I also believe Harrison Ford sort of DEMANDED that they kill off Han, as he really didn't want to do any more of the movies. He actually thought Han should have died in the original trilogy.
Rogue One was the "we need to fill that huge plot hole that has been tormenting us for literally generations" movie. I actually enjoyed it, but I went in expecting a tragedy. Continuity wise, you sort of new how it had to end. It was just a matter of seeing how it would get there.
I feel a lot of the current trash talking about TFA and RO is based on the hatred of TLJ. TLJ was horrible. Not from "SJW" point, but from just horrible filmmaking and storytelling. Rian Johnson has zero respect for the source material and DIDN'T EVEN TRY to make any of it work within the continuity of the entire franchise. Johnson was more interested in making a "Rian Johnson" movie than a Star Wars movie. The backlash is what hurt Solo (which, though I didn't like the actor they chose for Han, was a good space western otherwise). If TFA had been decent, I don't think people would be going back and trashing the other movies as well. A lot of it is just venom over TLJ.
I think another problem Disney had was the excision of the non-movie elements from the canon. I know why Disney moved in that direction--it wanted to untie its hands to create whatever stories it chose. But the net effect was to anger a fair percentage of the fans before the first movie ever hit theaters.
And then were was George Lucas's famous remark (which he quickly had to apologize for) about selling the Star Wars franchise to Disney being like selling his children to white slavers. When the father of a franchise denounces its current incarnation, how can that not lead to bad feelings?
I also think the long gap between movies played a part. Not only did it make it less likely that fans would know the backstory (hence the need for the rehash you mentioned), but it gave anticipation among die-hard fans so long to build that it would have been virtually impossible to satisfy their expectations.
Post by: Edward M. Grant on April 18, 2019, 02:18:39 AM
The Force Awakens was a competent movie that did what it needed to do. It wasn't great, but it wasn't bad.
Do you think anyone would have watched it if it didn't have Star Wars in the name?
Post by: bardsandsages on April 18, 2019, 03:02:26 AM
The Force Awakens was a competent movie that did what it needed to do. It wasn't great, but it wasn't bad.
Do you think anyone would have watched it if it didn't have Star Wars in the name?
Yes, and I think people would have been less critical of it if it wasn't a "Star Wars" movie.
Like Bill mentioned, a lot of it is perspective. The original Dragon Age game was amazing. Then DA2 came out and everyone was "WTF?" It wasn't that it was a bad game. It was a solid story with good characters. But after the open-world perspective of the original, the railroad feel compounded with the recycling of assets left a bad taste in a lot of people's mouths. If Dragon Age 2 had been made with a different world but the exact same mechanics, the backlash would never have been as severe. But when expectations run high, a moderately good game or movie looks worse than it actually is.
I also think that the male toxicity from a small group of obnoxious men poisoned the feelings toward the franchise. The movies have legitimate issues. But there was a very real misogynistic and racist undercurrent feeding the negativity. No, I am not saying everyone that hates the movies is a racist or a misogynist. But that very vocal group amplified everything that was wrong and drowned out a lot that was good (except for TLJ. There was very little redeemable about TLJ). The toxic anger and hate just fed and fed and fed into this narrative that the movies weren't just "bad" but "wrong." There was a mob mentality in play that too many people didn't realize. Like too much on the internet, venom feeds venom and spreads faster than measured dialogue.
Post by: TimothyEllis on April 18, 2019, 08:30:49 PM
The toxic anger and hate just fed and fed and fed into this narrative that the movies weren't just "bad" but "wrong."
I've said that all along.
Mouse wars is WRONG when labelled as Star Wars. Everything about it is WRONGWRONGWRONGWRONG.
But had they taken it out of the Stars Wars universe and made it as a stand alone trilogy with Space Wizards instead of Jedi, and Dark Wizards instead of Sith, and sold it as a female empowerment alternative to Star Wars, it would now be getting acclaim instead of hate.
Post by: Bill Hiatt on April 19, 2019, 12:34:19 AM
To some extent. I agree with Julie that at least one of the films is problematic for reasons having nothing to do with the franchise. But it's certainly true that when later additions to a franchise don't keep faith with the earlier material, that's just asking for trouble with the fans, which is exactly what happened.The toxic anger and hate just fed and fed and fed into this narrative that the movies weren't just "bad" but "wrong."
I've said that all along.
Mouse wars is WRONG when labelled as Star Wars. Everything about it is WRONGWRONGWRONGWRONG.
But had they taken it out of the Stars Wars universe and made it as a stand alone trilogy with Space Wizards instead of Jedi, and Dark Wizards instead of Sith, and sold it as a female empowerment alternative to Star Wars, it would now be getting acclaim instead of hate.
So many wrong turns could be avoided if companies were willing to put different ideas into new franchises rather than jamming them into old ones in which they didn't fit.
Post by: Maggie Ann on April 19, 2019, 01:33:13 AM
Post by: PJ Post on April 19, 2019, 10:50:31 AM
Quote from: TimothyEllis link=topic=2176.msg40642#msg40 than 642 date=1555583449
But had they taken it out of the Stars Wars universe and made it as a stand alone trilogy with Space Wizards instead of Jedi, and Dark Wizards instead of Sith, and sold it as a female empowerment alternative to Star Wars, it would now be getting acclaim instead of hate.
I can't agree with this. While the TLJ was cinematically beautiful, it was a terrible movie. It wasn't even consistent with itself. The tone was all over the place...was it a drama, an adventure or a comedy? Depends on what part of the scene you're watching, because every scene's pretty much all three. Every dramatic moment was followed by an out of place joke. It's called Bathos (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-QhdzQo66o). It was a disaster. The blatant (and poorly executed at that) political agenda was the least of its problems.
The Force Awakens was a competent movie that did what it needed to do.
Besides making a boatload of money, not sure I agree with this either. It was a remake/reboot of New Hope. It twisted the in-universe logic as to make no sense. Why is the First Order a thing? Why is the new super weapon another Death Star? And while we're on the subject, how can they afford to build a planet-sized weapon? Why are the Rebels...um, I mean the Resistance...fighting on their own? What happened to the Republic? And moreover, why would Luke, the guy who always sees the best in everyone, the potential in every situation, the good in every action, ever desert his family and those that depend on him? JJ f*cked up Luke's character way before Rian got to him.
Solo was every bit as bad as TLJ, just for different reasons. Why can't Lucuasfilm get competent directors for these movies? I was really disappointed in JJ (loved Super 8, Star Trek and Fringe), have no explanation for Rian and get the sense that poor Howard was brought in more so for triage than any directorial vision. Then again, it's been 'rumored' that it's Kennedy and the rest of the studio 'committee' that's responsible for these trainwrecks.
Post by: guest1291 on April 20, 2019, 05:50:39 AM
Return of the Jedi was a two hour toy commercial. Producer Gary Kurtz and George Lucas did not see eye to eye on this, and I side with Kurtz who was more about the integrity of the story. By this time Lucas had grown weary of the franchise and was more concerned with box office and merchandising.
Then years later with the prequels Lucas set about demystifying what was so gloriously mystical about the original iteration of his creation in the first place.
That mysticism is part of what made the original two films so great even to the point that the third entry in the original trilogy still manages to coast on the fumes of the first two films in the minds of many.
Then Disney comes along and like the rest of the current zeitgeist in Hollywood, there's this resistance to earnestness. Fairy tales are always being subverted now. Most Hollywood creatives now are these detached deconstructionists and TV-style writers or they're political animals refusing to be caught in an uncool pose. Everything's gotta be done with a wink and a smile.
The strange thing is everyone is so into "nerd culture" now and how cool it is, and yet the thing that actually made us nerds back in the day was our strong embrace of the earnest and the fairy tale to the point that it made us decidedly uncool.
Luke and Yoda and Vader and the Force weren't created specifically for spectacle and scenes and characters weren't written to be "badass". The fairy tale mysticism of the originals was brought into the world with heart and purpose and through changes in general societal norms and all the corporate ballyhoo and Hollywood post-modernism that's been lost.
Post by: Bill Hiatt on April 21, 2019, 12:52:01 AM
Star Wars was a fairy tale, fantastically realized, that all ages could enjoy. The Empire Strikes Back was its excellent, mythical continuation.Sad, but there's a lot of truth in that.
Return of the Jedi was a two hour toy commercial. Producer Gary Kurtz and George Lucas did not see eye to eye on this, and I side with Kurtz who was more about the integrity of the story. By this time Lucas had grown weary of the franchise and was more concerned with box office and merchandising.
Then years later with the prequels Lucas set about demystifying what was so gloriously mystical about the original iteration of his creation in the first place.
That mysticism is part of what made the original two films so great even to the point that the third entry in the original trilogy still manages to coast on the fumes of the first two films in the minds of many.
Then Disney comes along and like the rest of the current zeitgeist in Hollywood, there's this resistance to earnestness. Fairy tales are always being subverted now. Most Hollywood creatives now are these detached deconstructionists and TV-style writers or they're political animals refusing to be caught in an uncool pose. Everything's gotta be done with a wink and a smile.
The strange thing is everyone is so into "nerd culture" now and how cool it is, and yet the thing that actually made us nerds back in the day was our strong embrace of the earnest and the fairy tale to the point that it made us decidedly uncool.
Luke and Yoda and Vader and the Force weren't created specifically for spectacle and scenes and characters weren't written to be "badass". The fairy tale mysticism of the originals was brought into the world with heart and purpose and through changes in general societal norms and all the corporate ballyhoo and Hollywood post-modernism that's been lost.
Post by: TimothyEllis on April 21, 2019, 12:55:16 AM
The strange thing is everyone is so into "nerd culture" now and how cool it is, and yet the thing that actually made us nerds back in the day was our strong embrace of the earnest and the fairy tale to the point that it made us decidedly uncool.
Random thought: Revenge of the Nerds would be impossible to reboot these days. And ironically, the nerds won.
Post by: Bill Hiatt on April 21, 2019, 12:58:31 AM
I'm not sure anything is completely impossible to reboot. However, if it were rebooted, it would probably be unrecognizable.The strange thing is everyone is so into "nerd culture" now and how cool it is, and yet the thing that actually made us nerds back in the day was our strong embrace of the earnest and the fairy tale to the point that it made us decidedly uncool.
Random thought: Revenge of the Nerds would be impossible to reboot these days. And ironically, the nerds won.
Post by: guest1291 on April 21, 2019, 03:16:00 AM
I'm not sure anything is completely impossible to reboot. However, if it were rebooted, it would probably be unrecognizable.The strange thing is everyone is so into "nerd culture" now and how cool it is, and yet the thing that actually made us nerds back in the day was our strong embrace of the earnest and the fairy tale to the point that it made us decidedly uncool.
Random thought: Revenge of the Nerds would be impossible to reboot these days. And ironically, the nerds won.
This exactly. It would star Will Ferrell and Jason Bateman and Sarah Silverman and Jack Black (nothing against them, I like them) and it would be a cynical, mean-spirited, post-modern joke-fest with multiple cheap groin shots and prat-falls that you could shove into a 2 minute trailer, and it would be lacking in real heart.
Post by: Post-Doctorate D on April 21, 2019, 03:22:56 AM
And ironically, the nerds won.
IRL? Are you sure it wasn't the posers that actually won?
Post by: Denise on April 21, 2019, 04:02:29 AM
I agree not everyone likes the Sequel Trilogy, and I think it has problems, but there's also The Mandalorian (which seems super promising), Rebels, The Clone Wars, the books, games. etc.
It's neat to see people enjoying a fictional universe.
Post by: PJ Post on April 21, 2019, 09:04:44 AM
The Clone Wars was great. So we know it can be done - originality, action, story, deeper themes and heart.
Post by: Post-Doctorate D on April 21, 2019, 09:16:29 AM
The Clone Wars was great. So we know it can be done - originality, action, story, deeper themes and heart.
It was also released four years before Disney bought Lucasfilm.
Post by: PJ Post on April 21, 2019, 09:21:12 AM
Post by: bardsandsages on April 22, 2019, 10:36:58 PM
Nevertheless. I mean, Disney didn't ruin Pixar.
Also obviously didn't ruin Marvel.
I don't really think we can "blame" Disney for the current problems with Star Wars. We know Disney has a track record for actually managing brands fairly well. I do think Kennedy and the "movie making by committee" problem is the root issue. There is no unifying vision for what is going on, just a bunch of random people creating work-for-hire pieces, each existing in a vacuum from the others.
Scrapping the old canon was the worst mistake possible. They had such a wealth of established lore and fantastic characters there to work with. Instead, they went with the "recreate the wheel" mentality and tried to do everything from scratch, mucking it up in the process.
But I also think Disney realizes all of this and is going to bring down the hammer. They already threatened EA that if they screw up the next SW games, they will lose the license (in case people were wondering why the next game is single-player, no online, and no microtransactions...out of EA of all companies). Mandalorians DOES look good so far. And from what little I have heard of the possible Old Republic project, it is supposed to tack fairly close to the old canon lore.
Post by: Tom Wood on April 23, 2019, 01:23:42 AM
https://www.google.com/search?client=ms-android-verizon&q=lucas%20idea%20for%20the%203rd%20trilogy&ved=2ahUKEwjCodLV-uPhAhVFhuAKHRsSBaoQsKwBKAB6BAgOEAI&biw=360&bih=560 (https://www.google.com/search?client=ms-android-verizon&q=lucas%20idea%20for%20the%203rd%20trilogy&ved=2ahUKEwjCodLV-uPhAhVFhuAKHRsSBaoQsKwBKAB6BAgOEAI&biw=360&bih=560)