Rogue One: 2 Rebellious 2 Fail

[red snow]

5 hours ago, Rhom said:

I agree.  Part of what makes the MCU work so well is that they have different themes.  The buddy movie, the heist flick, the WW2 drama...

Disney is full of smart people, at some point someone is going to have to point out that there's a big Galaxy out there far, far away.

I guess the thing Disney is still trying to crack is how to make the different themes still feel like star wars. There's always a danger that in keeping Star Wars "esentials" it will bury the new elements. Of course it shouldn't be too hard to do one focused on crime (but you have to keep in mind the films are going to be family friendly) or Force-based (stick them on a planet that's force based not tech based). It should be easier given they have a galaxy to explore but that also means there's a potential hazard of being unrecognizable to the core franchise. Marvel tends to get away with it by having the same plot ingredients to most of their films eg "origin stories" and then world-ending threat that requires the defeat of hordes of CGI villains we don't care about. That and the fact they have the benefit of being set on our earth maing it far easier to accept as connected (although GOTG proved that's not essential). We could argue that "death star" appears to be the star wars plot ingredient - no doubt young Han Solo will somehow destroy a death star prototype in his film. They have storm troopers/droids in the bag for faceless hordes in act III. On the brightside Star Wars tends to have good villains (even in their bad films) so I think they'll fair better there.

They clearly got cold feet over Rogue One as a war film so while a noir star wars would be great, I don't think they'll be that adventurous until they have the shared universe films running like clock-work. It's probably why films featuring the Episode IV-VI characters is the most likely for the time being. Rogue One may turn out to be the most adventurous of the anthologies. Hopefully it works and Wert's suggestion of a sequel where the remainder of the team (assuming there are survivors) are helping behind the scenes with another mission.

The strange thing for me is how there's a rich gap between VI and VII to explore. The cartoons and comics (AFAIK) haven't explored that period. I suspect it's off limits until the new trilogy ends (I'm assuming Snoke, the knights of Rey and Luke and hopefully Leia will provide some answers that involve filling that gap). Maybe once the trilogy is complete they'll announce films set in that era. Depending on how interesting Snoke turns out to be - he could provide an interesting prequel as it seems he was around for a while. We might also get new characters who catch on in the remaining films. Maybe Captain Phasma will get some redemption and they'll do a film about her - if only to add fuel to the Fett vs Phasma battle   Maybe they'll crossover? I'd actually like a bounty hunter film - like saving catching private ryan where several bounty hunters compete in capturing someone. Probably connected to building the death star but could be Yoda or Obi Wan.

[Maia]

14 hours ago, Werthead said:

I wouldn't be surprised if the original plan was that Vader wouldn't be in it at all, and he was added in rewrites. In fact, it makes a lot less sense for just Vader to be in it than Vader and Tarkin together.

 

Why? Vader was the one chasing the plans, so it always made sense that he'd appear in the end and learn where they have been transmitted to.  Tarkin... he was in command of the Death Star at the time of the New Hope, sure, but weren't the plans stolen from some other Imperial installation? It always seemed so to me. Also, Vader is easier to include in movies because anybody could be in that suit and the voice actor, who is the main component of his on-screen identity is still alive and capable enough, IMHO. Which is why I don't quite understand why they insist on using Vader "sparingly" - you'd think that they'd jump on  this possibly last opportunity to bolster his popularity on the large screen, given how lucrative the character is in merchandizing, etc. and how his influence is still strongly felt in the new ongoing trilogy. I understand them not wanting to defang him by portraying him being defeated too much, but he sorta kinda wins this one? Given that he successfully learns destination of the plans and none of the rebel heroes who obtained the plans or fought in that engagement appear in the OT.

 

14 hours ago, Werthead said:

 The Boba Fett one was a lock when Lawrence Kasdan was going to write it, but he's now not going to (reading between the lines, possibly because they rejected his idea that the original trilogy Boba Fett was still a mysterious man with no name who killed the clone Boba Fett from the Clone Wars and stole his identity) and they've moved it onto the backburner.

Really? Seems like an odd hill to die on. Not that I am unhappy about it - I never understood Boba's popularity and thought that the Fetts in AoTC, leave alone as templates for the clone troopers, were tacked on, pandering BS.

 

12 hours ago, Astromech said:

I like to pretend the prequels don't exist but others see it differently. I don't see a Vader-centric film in the near future. Maybe more films with Vader cameos and him acting peripherally to the main arc, as in Rogue One, but not ones focused primarily on him.

Yea, Vader-centric films would have to be tragedies for the "good" protagonists, or they risk weakening the character too much. Don't see Disney (or Lucas Arts, for that matter) going there. Not after the prequels have poisoned the well.

 

Quote

I would love to see some films from other time periods in the Star Wars universe, but studio execs may not think it "familiar enough" for a broad viewing audience.

 

Yea, I'd love an Old _Old_ Republic movie, during the Jedi - Sith struggle or whatever. In the spirit of the 2 single-player KOTOR games. Unlikely, alas. Or a film about Mon Mothma. Ditto. Or a post-Endor film with everybody re-cast. Maybe? Or an Obi-Wan film - surely he wasn't spending his whole time on Tatooine while Luke was young? There is some meaty stuff in a story of a Jedi trying to live undercover, avoiding detection, yet still uphold the ideal of service, etc. Ahsoka movie... I can dream. Maybe with some non-evil, but strictly Imperial loyalist investigator figure on their trail?

Yea, "not familiar enough" tends to keep even the franchise _fiction_ tightly bound to the casts of whatever movies/series (Star Trek, Babylon 5, Star Wars that I've sampled so far), to it's detriment, IMHO. All those rich, interesting worlds to explore, but it is never truly allowed because not only must certain canonical characters appear, but overall character list has to be kept  short, which usually results in pretty shallow narrative. IMHO, YMMV.

 

55 minutes ago, red snow said:

 Rogue One may turn out to be the most adventurous of the anthologies. Hopefully it works and Wert's suggestion of a sequel where the remainder of the team (assuming there are survivors) are helping behind the scenes with another mission.

Well, the survivor(s) could be thrown into some terrible prison/camp rather than make a clean escape, just for that eventuality. If a sequel doesn't get made, well, it would be clear why this person/people didn't get a chance to be prominent again during the Rebellion, but if they do decide on a sequel, they can break out/ be freed, incidentally dipping into yet another genre under Star Wars aegis.

 

55 minutes ago, red snow said:

The strange thing for me is how there's a rich gap between VI and VII to explore. The cartoons and comics (AFAIK) haven't explored that period. I suspect it's off limits until the new trilogy ends (I'm assuming Snoke, the knights of Rey and Luke and hopefully Leia will provide some answers that involve filling that gap). Maybe once the trilogy is complete they'll announce films set in that era.

Indeed. Though a lot of potentially interesting stuff would have to be somewhat political, but maybe they'll finally recover from the trauma of PT and realise that a bit of politics, done right, can be quite entertaining.

 

55 minutes ago, red snow said:

I'd actually like a bounty hunter film - like saving catching private ryan where several bounty hunters compete in capturing someone. Probably connected to building the death star but could be Yoda or Obi Wan.

Yea, I could see bounty hunters being important antagonists for Obi Wan, with lots of characterization and screen time, but a movie where they  are actualy protagonists? Not sure. Maybe if one of them somehow ends up working for the Rebellion/New Republic?

[Rhom]

Regarding the unlikely prospect of a "film noir", I think it highly improbable considering the cancellation of the Star Wars game to be set in the Coruscant lower levels.  (1313 Was that the name?)

[red snow]

4 hours ago, Maia said:

 

 

 

Yea, I could see bounty hunters being important antagonists for Obi Wan, with lots of characterization and screen time, but a movie where they  are actualy protagonists? Not sure. Maybe if one of them somehow ends up working for the Rebellion/New Republic?

Good point in that it's unlikely they'd have a film with the bounty hunters as the protagonists. I guess not all bounty hunters are necessarily bad but if they were hunting Obi-wan they'd be antagonists just because we know he's a good guy (even if it could be easily justified as them hunting down the "bin laden" of the empire from an empire POV). If they framed it so that we didn't know who they were hunting (due to an alias or description we don't know of) it'd make for a hell of a cool surprise for them to have Ewan McGregor in the final scene.

I think if Rogue one works with a group of rebels/mercenaries it's not impossible to do a bounty hunter film. Just include some more sympathetic bounty hunters or have a really toxic bounty.

44 minutes ago, Rhom said:

Regarding the unlikely prospect of a "film noir", I think it highly improbable considering the cancellation of the Star Wars game to be set in the Coruscant lower levels.  (1313 Was that the name?)

I think you're right but you could also take it the other way and postulate it was shelved because Disney were thinking of making a film and didn't want the game getting in the way of their development.

[RumHam]

15 hours ago, Rhom said:

I agree.  Part of what makes the MCU work so well is that they have different themes.  The buddy movie, the heist flick, the WW2 drama...

Disney is full of smart people, at some point someone is going to have to point out that there's a big Galaxy out there far, far away.

You'd think so, but then weren't there reports of re-shoots because this one strayed too far from what they felt a Star Wars movie should be? I guess that could mean a few things. But I'm still nervous they got scared and the film will suffer for it. 

 

 

[RumHam]

22 hours ago, Werthead said:

This thread inspired me to take a much more in-depth look at the Star Wars movies in production or that have been planned for the future.

Quote

The second of the new Star Wars episodes is directed by Rian Johnson, who is extremely well-respected for his original SF movies Brick and Looper

Am I right that SF stands for science fiction? Because Brick was not that. 

[Werthead]

Quote

Yea, "not familiar enough" tends to keep even the franchise _fiction_ tightly bound to the casts of whatever movies/series (Star Trek, Babylon 5, Star Wars that I've sampled so far), to it's detriment, IMHO. All those rich, interesting worlds to explore, but it is never truly allowed because not only must certain canonical characters appear, but overall character list has to be kept  short, which usually results in pretty shallow narrative. IMHO, YMMV.

Star Trek very successfully broke away from that mould though. TNG, DS9 and Voyager (and Enterprise at the start) were all successful despite each one establishing a new paradigm and cast of characters. Babylon 5 failed but then it wasn't massive to start with and the new characters and stories were all a bit shit, which was a key part of the problem.

Quote

You'd think so, but then weren't there reports of re-shoots because this one strayed too far from what they felt a Star Wars movie should be? I guess that could mean a few things. But I'm still nervous they got scared and the film will suffer for it. 

Not at all. As far as can be told, the reshoots were just the standard ones they allocate nowdays to every big movie but people freaked out about them in this case for some reason.

Quote

Am I right that SF stands for science fiction? Because Brick was not that. 

Never seen it, which I should remedy.

 

 

 

[red snow]

3 hours ago, Werthead said:

Star Trek very successfully broke away from that mould though. TNG, DS9 and Voyager (and Enterprise at the start) were all successful despite each one establishing a new paradigm and cast of characters. Babylon 5 failed but then it wasn't massive to start with and the new characters and stories were all a bit shit, which was a key part of the problem.

Not at all. As far as can be told, the reshoots were just the standard ones they allocate nowdays to every big movie but people freaked out about them in this case for some reason.

Never seen it, which I should remedy.

 

 

 

I think there's a mixture on the thread between "doing a spin off" and "doing a spin-off that is very different from the original". While the spin offs worked, Besides DS9 it was still very clearly "star trek" . They didn't do a crime noir set on Romulus or a show about capitalism on the Ferenghi homeworld. They were all still "moving around in a space-ship encountering aliens". That still gives them plenty of scope but it was always the federation doing things the federation away. Again, DS9 was much more of an exception and probably part of the reason its remembered more fondly now than it may have been at the time. I may be wrong regarding Enterprise but the first season I watched still felt very much like "star Trek".

I think the reason people are worried about reshoots are because two of the most talked about re-shoots of the last 12 months were Fant4stic and Suicide Squad both of which wound up feeling very disjointed because it was clear they had remixed the original film with additional scenes to turn it into something else. It may be the case it's just "business as usual" re-shoots for Rogue one but there were many (sourced?) claims that it was due to Rogue One feeling too much like a war film and not enough like Star Wars.

 

[Fez]

18 hours ago, RumHam said:

Am I right that SF stands for science fiction? Because Brick was not that. 

How else can you explain high school students talking like that?

 

Regarding the Rogue One reshoots, reshoots have happened all the time for movies for decades, its only recently that we started reading way too much into them. It could be that Disney got cold feet about the war themes, or it could be that some of the scene transitions weren't working and needed to add some more context for a couple things that ADR couldn't cover.

Also, if you look at the Marvel, the first few movies were not doing the whole "each movie has a different vibe to it." Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, and Iron Man 2 were all straightforward superhero movies, it was only after that the they started playing with the formula. Rogue One is only the second new Star Wars movie and the first anthology movie, and it wouldn't surprise me at all if Disney wants a few more successes under their belts with the franchise before they start loosening things up a bit.

[Werthead]

Sometimes reshoots are just to give the director and editor more options. In LotR Jackson shout an absolute shit-ton of new scenes in the car park, dressed up to look like various locations in close-up. Sometimes he went with what they filmed on the original year-long shoot and sometimes they went with what they shot in the car park. But the reshoots were always part of the process.

The difference is with films like Star Trey Beyond and Suicide Squad, where perhaps brief reshoots were planned but looking at the film in the edit picked out plot issues they needed to fix (successfully, with Star Trek Beyond) or the studio decided they wanted to go in a different direction (Suicide Squad). The latter is when it's a bad idea, as what you're doing is going to clash badly with the material from the original shoot.

[PetyrPunkinhead]

On 8/16/2016 at 0:34 PM, Corvinus said:

Or maybe knowing that, she flees the Order, and becomes a bounty hunter with a badass armor, basically turning into what fans have thought she would be from the beginning - the female Boba Fett.

We really need to just let it go already with Phasma fanfic. Phasma ain't no Boba Fett!!!

Hell, she ain't even no Jango Fett. (Which is a more apt comparison due to shiny armor, as I've already mentioned.) :p

[red snow]

13 hours ago, Werthead said:

Sometimes reshoots are just to give the director and editor more options. In LotR Jackson shout an absolute shit-ton of new scenes in the car park, dressed up to look like various locations in close-up. Sometimes he went with what they filmed on the original year-long shoot and sometimes they went with what they shot in the car park. But the reshoots were always part of the process.

The difference is with films like Star Trey Beyond and Suicide Squad, where perhaps brief reshoots were planned but looking at the film in the edit picked out plot issues they needed to fix (successfully, with Star Trek Beyond) or the studio decided they wanted to go in a different direction (Suicide Squad). The latter is when it's a bad idea, as what you're doing is going to clash badly with the material from the original shoot.

I think reshoots at the behest of the director aren't so worrying. They've looked at the footage and may notice something is missing or may have got the writers to create some additional scenes. I think it's more likely to be problematic when the director is told to put in new scenes to alter the film from the way they wanted (some times it's not even the original director handling the reshoots). This was a rumour going around with Rogue One as well. But rumours aren't solid and it may just be due to the fact it's Rogue One and the fact the director of Fant4stic was originally lined up to do a star wars film too.

It should be pretty easy to spot if the tone of the film is mixed. I suspect Disney/lucasfilm will ultimately have the best interests of the film in mind. I also keep reminding myself that "Godzilla" was terrible and could have probably benefitted from some Disney style reshoots to course correct. Unless "Godzilla" was the result of some reshoots but the film seemed consistent to me (just a shame it was consistntly dull)

[HexMachina]

What the fascination with Bobba Fett? Sure he is a cool and somewhat menacing figure, but he doesn't really have much characterisation within the movies. I certainly hope they do more with Phasma than they did with Fett

[Nictarion]

2 hours ago, HelenaExMachina said:

What the fascination with Bobba Fett? Sure he is a cool and somewhat menacing figure, but he doesn't really have much characterisation within the movies. I certainly hope they do more with Phasma than they did with Fett

No disintegrations!

[The BlackBear]

Few more images:

http://makingstarwars.net/2016/08/new-rogue-one-a-star-wars-story-images-surface/

[The Mother of The Others]

This movie is going to be like if the original Star Wars used its death star's huge antenna dish to compress one of Darth Vader's butt farts into a transmission that  traveled forward in time through the folded dimensions of space to arrive in 2017.   I tell you, that's what this movie will feel like.  You'll get the impression that Star Wars farted and now we have this Rogue One pale echo of stench wafting to our era from the distant past, as if we're seeing a parallel universe's SLIGHTLY different version of the 1976 Star Wars.  What a treat.   It's so sad that they can't get any ideas injected into this franchise.  The Force is forcing the new owners to play it safe, they're so concerned with not wrecking the property that they're too timid to do anything with it, just rehash the same trip to the death star, like a rebounding fart through the decades that's so stale now you can't even tell anymore if George Lucas ate a burrito or what.

[Corvinus85]

1 hour ago, The Mother of The Others said:

This movie is going to be like if the original Star Wars used its death star's huge antenna dish to compress one of Darth Vader's butt farts into a transmission that  traveled forward in time through the folded dimensions of space to arrive in 2017.   I tell you, that's what this movie will feel like.  You'll get the impression that Star Wars farted and now we have this Rogue One pale echo of stench wafting to our era from the distant past, as if we're seeing a parallel universe's SLIGHTLY different version of the 1976 Star Wars.  What a treat.   It's so sad that they can't get any ideas injected into this franchise.  The Force is forcing the new owners to play it safe, they're so concerned with not wrecking the property that they're too timid to do anything with it, just rehash the same trip to the death star, like a rebounding fart through the decades that's so stale now you can't even tell anymore if George Lucas ate a burrito or what.

You've used a variation of the word "fart" three times in your post, and made another reference to it by using a synonymous expression. Why the obsession? 

[Martini Sigil]

1 hour ago, The Mother of The Others said:

This movie is going to be like if the original Star Wars used its death star's huge antenna dish to compress one of Darth Vader's butt farts into a transmission that  traveled forward in time through the folded dimensions of space to arrive in 2017.   I tell you, that's what this movie will feel like.  You'll get the impression that Star Wars farted and now we have this Rogue One pale echo of stench wafting to our era from the distant past, as if we're seeing a parallel universe's SLIGHTLY different version of the 1976 Star Wars.  What a treat.   It's so sad that they can't get any ideas injected into this franchise.  The Force is forcing the new owners to play it safe, they're so concerned with not wrecking the property that they're too timid to do anything with it, just rehash the same trip to the death star, like a rebounding fart through the decades that's so stale now you can't even tell anymore if George Lucas ate a burrito or what.

I bet George Lucas favorite boxer was Gaseous Clay .... still this flick looks like it'll be a real gas... the best since Gone with the Wind...  a real blast from the past.... It'll be absolutely flatulence.... er.... I mean fabulous

[PetyrPunkinhead]

25 minutes ago, Corvinus said:

You've used a variation of the word "fart" three times in your post, and made another reference to it by using a synonymous expression. Why the obsession? 

Yeah, something definitely smells off about TMoTO's post. I'm not sure why he's making such a big stink over Rogue One.

[HexMachina]

6 hours ago, PetyrPunkinhead said:

Yeah, something definitely smells off about TMoTO's post. I'm not sure why he's making such a big stink over Rogue One.

It probably smells off because it's a crock of shit as per usual