Jump to content

Star Wars: a story for every fan? (Andor Spoilers)


Ser Scot A Ellison
 Share

Recommended Posts

'The Mandalorian' Season 3 Sets March Release Date
The 'Star Wars' series heads to Mandalore this winter.

https://collider.com/the-mandalorian-season-3-release-date-2023/

Quote

but at Brazil’s Comic-Con Experience, series producers Jon Favreau and Dave Filoni and series star Pedro Pascal were on hand to announce that The Mandalorian Season 3 will premiere on March 1, 2023.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, mormont said:

Sorry to be That Guy, but again, there's a conflation there, Jax, of 'quality' and 'target audience'. 

Most of the SW stuff that's explicitly aimed at kids (e.g. some of the animated series) is of notably good quality. There's a difference between 'I'm not the target audience' and 'this is objectively bad', and the failure to understand that lies behind a lot of the more unhinged social media campaigns against certain media products in recent years.

I agree with that - Prodigy is a great Star Trek show which can be enjoyed by all ages never mind the fact that the target audience are children.

TCW does have the objective issue of the writers dumbing down the setting - dropping subtitles for alien languages, not using the names 'Darth Tyranus' or 'Confederacy of Independent Systems' for the first couple of seasons, turn most Separatists into clear villains, lots of childish battle droid humor, etc.

That was clearly part of the original guidelines for the show which was eventually dropped, most likely because of complaints from the fandom. And this happened to coincide with the writers telling more mature stories.

16 hours ago, Heartofice said:

What is the target audience for Clone Wars? On the face of it, it feels like youngish kids, but then some episodes are really dark and actually pretty horrific, maybe some of the nastiest stuff in the whole SW universe. When people are getting killed, tortured, when there are zombies and undead running around suddenly you start to think is there some confusion as to who they made this show for?

One imagined Lucas first pushed for the show to be a success (with the youngsters) and then switched to doing what he wanted to do, resulting in the (more) extreme stories we get in later seasons. But that's a common thing in Star Wars. TPM is a movie for children, while ROTS is not ... at least not to the same degree.

Edited by Lord Varys
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Rhom said:

ETA:  As I think about it, that would probably involve a bit more computer de-aging of a deceased actor and Mark Hamil than I really am comfortable with though.  :dunno: 

 

3 hours ago, Corvinus85 said:

Yeah Leia would be a problem. I suppose they could focus again on the little people, the blue collar people, like they did in Andor.

I don't know which hollywood type people need to hear this, but if they need to portray a fictional character at a particular age, and the original actor for that character is the wrong age, then I'm reliably informed that there are in fact other actors who will, in exchange for money, portray fictional characters on screen.

I mean, they've even already done it with Solo, and others like Mon Mothma. I don't see why they can't just recast these roles if needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Liffguard said:

 

I don't know which hollywood type people need to hear this, but if they need to portray a fictional character at a particular age, and the original actor for that character is the wrong age, then I'm reliably informed that there are in fact other actors who will, in exchange for money, portray fictional characters on screen.

I mean, they've even already done it with Solo, and others like Mon Mothma. I don't see why they can't just recast these roles if needed.

Watched Rogue One at the weekend. Was yanked out of the story every single time CG Peter Cushing appeared onscreen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Liffguard said:

 

I don't know which hollywood type people need to hear this, but if they need to portray a fictional character at a particular age, and the original actor for that character is the wrong age, then I'm reliably informed that there are in fact other actors who will, in exchange for money, portray fictional characters on screen.

I mean, they've even already done it with Solo, and others like Mon Mothma. I don't see why they can't just recast these roles if needed.

Fuck the Holograms, protect jobs for humans!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Lord of Oop North said:

Fuck the Holograms

Robin Williams went above and beyond to stop his image being used

Quote

 

It used to be that death signalled a very definite end to a celebrity career. But with the advent of CGI and hologram technology, actors and musicians no longer need to be alive to appear in new films and adverts – or even perform on stage.

However, the digital afterlife is not for everyone. New documents from the estate of Robin Williams, the actor who took his own life last August, show that he has put in place a restriction on his image, or any likeness of his image, being used for 25 years after his death.

Williams, who is known for films such as Good Will Hunting and Mrs Doubtfire, filed a deed which states that his image cannot be used in any film or publicity until 2039 and also passed on the rights to his name, signature, photograph and likeness to the Windfall Foundation, set up in his name.

It is a move that restricts any posthumous exploitation of the actor’s image, be it through using CGI to impose him into a film or advert or creating a live hologram of him performing standup. While California law already protects the statutory right to publicity – which grants individuals the right to say what their image can and cannot be used for up to 70 years after death – this deed adds another layer of security on top of that. Such a law does not exist in the UK.

Rachel Alexander, a leading privacy lawyer at Wiggin, a firm specialising in entertainment law, said that while this was the first time she had seen a celebrity place such rigid restrictions on their image after their death, she predicted it would become more common in the future.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I finished Andor and I absolutely loved it! I'm genuinely amazed at how good it is, compared to previous shows. It's so refreshing to have a SW show for an older audience and that deals with serious topics in a more nuanced way. I admit I was skeptical about this show because it felt random and an unecessary spinoff from a standalone movie, and I wasn't sure what they were going to do with it. But to focus not only on Andor, but also on the Imperials, the Rebels and society at large, was a great decision. They showed this world in a way we haven't often seen before.

The acting, the photography, the direction and of course the writing, among all other elements, were excellent all around, and I like that they retained the look and feel of the OT (I'm a big fan of the (now) retro-future of SW). I totally believe that this takes place in the same universe as that trilogy despite the real life decades in between both works. That doesn't always happen with prequels/sequels.

The music was also pretty good and I liked that they didn't bring in famous characters in a gratuitious way. I'm so glad we didn't see either Palpatine or Vader. Just mentioning the Emperor is enough to convey his character, the dread and power; we don't need to see him. It's far more effective this way.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also hate the sequel trilogy and I still have so many questions. 

Why is the galaxy empty? (Andor was so good at showing a rich world btw). Where is the New Republic  government? Where is the army? Why didn't we see Coruscant? Why are they rebels again? Shouldn't the First Order be the rebels now, trying to stage a coup and install a new government? Why are they so powerful? How are there not more Jedi? What has Luke been doing and why is he alone?

Even on a character level they dropped the ball, especially Rey and Finn. But even Snoke is an enigma. TFA could have done a better job setting up and establishing things, but TLJ just added more problems to those already present imo, to an unsalvageable degree.

Now they have 30 years to fill but it's basically trying to patch up the holes and come up with something decent to bridge the two trilogies. Good luck with that. l'm not surprised they went back to the prequel/Empire era...no wonder...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Lady Anna said:

Why are they rebels again? Shouldn't the First Order be the rebels now, trying to stage a coup and install a new government? Why are they so powerful? 

Because JJ Abrams and Rian Johnson were lazy and decided to just repeat the story of the Original Trilogy without doing any world-building.

The Thrawn trilogy by Timothy Zahn did a great job of world-building and developing the SW universe in the wake of ROTJ.

Edited by Darryk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Darryk said:

Because JJ Abrams and Rian Johnson were lazy and decided to just repeat the story of the Original Trilogy without doing any world-building.

The Thrawn trilogy by Timothy Zahn did a great job of world-building and developing the SW universe in the wake of ROTJ.

That's what makes me so sad.  Just take the Zahn trilogy and make some changes to it to make it fit 30 years later.  If not a true adaptation, use it for inspiration.  Instead... nope.

Edited by Rhom
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Darryk said:

Because JJ Abrams and Rian Johnson were lazy and decided to just repeat the story of the Original Trilogy without doing any world-building.

The Thrawn trilogy by Timothy Zahn did a great job of world-building and developing the SW universe in the wake of ROTJ.

I have not read that trilogy but I am familiar with the story. It does seem much better.

As for the laziness....yeah. I guess what's more shocking is that they would be so lazy and incompetent while in charge of such a work. Cause the content of their work comes from that in the first place. But anyway.... it's done and I guess we just have to hope for more works like Andor. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because they wanted to get it out quickly and not be bogged down by an individual vision and goal. I also think JJ didn't want it to be 'his' trilogy either, and at the time they didn't have the overall idea of someone running things long term. 

Their goal was to get money and to get some credit for making a more Star Warsy movie than the prequels. For the most part in TFA that succeeded; having a retread of the OT was largely fine by audiences. But in retrospect it was a colossally poor plan that sacrificed long term goodwill for short term gains. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

JJ Abrams is always lazy.  He doesn’t give a shit about story.  He cares about spectical above all else.  That and lens flares…

I think the man hates exposition. He likes events happening, even if there isn't always a logical reason for the events to be happening in the first place. On top of that his mystery box style of storytelling did not fit Star Wars at all. I find it kind of funny that he writes and directs the first time, comes back to write and direct the third film and doesn't bother to answer some of the questions he set up in his first movie. "It's a good question..............FOR ANOTHER DAY".

Edited by sifth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...