32 minutes ago, 2P51 said:

maybe a background check/mental health eval for directors being considered

I smell a Trevorrow reference. ?

From all of the entertainment news (aka gossip) I’ve heard, he started to believe his own press after Jurassic World, and let its success spur him to act as if he were the new captain of the entire franchise.

Sort of the opposite of the Chris Pratt situation he and Spielberg mentioned in a JW bonus feature. Trevorrow has a tough time selling Spielberg on Pratt, but finally did it. This was before GotG, but when that came out before JW, it “made us look really smart casting him.”

1 hour ago, Donovan Morningfire said:

Interestingly enough, I just listened to the latest Order 66 podcast where they discuss their various thoughts on the film, and GM Chris had much the same stance, in that as he saw the film additional times (three in total), the less he liked it and the more he found problems with the story. Granted, a few of those problems were cut down by their guest host who posited some very good points that Chris hadn't really taken into consideration.

Myself, being a child of the 80's, I'm no stranger to films where the plot has about as much depth as a sheet of paper and the resilience to scrutiny as a wet sheet of paper, so that didn't bother me all that much with regards to Solo.

But then, Solo was never a movie that set out to revolutionize either the franchise or shake up cinema as we know it or light the world on fire. It's simply a fun popcorn flick, and is just asking to be treated as nothing more than a couple hours' worth of escapism.

My own view, some of the MCU's offerings (Guardians of the Galaxy and Ant-Man) are much the same in terms of what they set out to be. GotG just happened to be lightning in a bottle and struck box-office gold (if any of the MCU's films should have bombed, GotG was it). And I doubt Ant-Man and Wasp is going to see nearly the success that Avengers: Infinity War is enjoying.

Funny, I have the opposite. I saw it twice (opening Friday with my gaming group, following Friday with my mom and her friend, Dad's waiting for Blu-Ray), and I enjoyed it just as much the second time around. I don't think there's anything shallow or wrong with the story, at least not to the point where the premise starts to fall apart due to plot holes. It made as much sense as Star Wars ever does, and the character's decisions flow organically from their established traits and the situations they find themselves in. Yeah, I agree it's no high art film or change in paradigm of cinematic entertainment, but it's a solid entry into the franchise that's engaging, interesting, emotional, and above all, fun.

1 hour ago, ErikModi said:

Yeah, I agree it's no high art film or change in paradigm of cinematic entertainment, but it's a solid entry into the franchise that's engaging, interesting, emotional, and above all, fun.

And I think that's part of the issue, is that the more vitriolic members of the fanbase are trying to view Star Wars films (old and new) as high art films when the reality is that even the much beloved original films would collapse just as fast (if not faster) under the same degree of scrutiny that the newest films are being placed under.

I think Scott Alden of The Movie Defenders podcast put it best when he said that the main problem with the folks that are going out of their way to bash the new films is that they want the same kind of experience they had back when they were kids, but simply can't because they're no longer kids, and it pisses them off even if they can't or won't admit it to themselves.

And kind of my attitude to the Prequels. They were far from perfect films, and probably could have been made much better than they are, but people were measuring against them of the metric of the original Star Wars . The original Star Wars that changed the face of popular culture overnight . The original Star Wars that invented the concept of the summer blockbuster . The original Star Wars that made people take science fiction seriously again . The original Star Wars that changed the way movies were made, especially in the approach to special effects . The original Star Wars that made studios scramble for any script they had with spaceships in it , giving us films like Alien and Star Trek: The Motion Picture , neither of which would have been made if Star Wars hadn't come along and made the public hungry for more sci-fi stuff. There's just no way the Prequels, even if they were done perfectly, would have created that kind of paradigm shift again. Yet everyone seemed to expect them to, even if subconsciously, and yes that includes myself. Granted, even you judge them just for what they are they have more flaws than the Original Trilogy, but they actually do work when you take them as parts of a whole with the OT (in my opinion).

Solo's kind of the same way. It's not the groundbreaking change in the very bedrock of cinema, but it was never going to be. It's an enjoyable story, well-told, and that's really all it needs to be. If 90% of anything is crap , simply having something that falls into that 10% that isn't is a victory. Having it catapult into that 1% that becomes an "instant classic" remembered fondly for years is astonishing, having it fall into the 0.0000001% that has a lasting impact on culture as a whole is miraculous.

17 hours ago, 2P51 said:

Drama and emotion aside I'm curious what changes get made if any. I find it hard to believe the Mouse High Command will just shrug off a $200 billion +ish hit and not do something. I don't know about any of the 'strom the Bastille' calls for KKs head, but I bet something gets done.

It sounds like part of the issue was that the original directors were doing multiple takes of every scene and figuring they'd "find the movie in the editing room," causing delays in production and subsequently jacking up the cost of the film.

Seeing as how Ron Howard was able to get the shots done in only a couple of takes, I suspect the major change will be keeping the directors on future films focused on getting the shots done in as few takes as possible, and not going all "artiste" and shooting scenes until they're "just right."

22 minutes ago, Donovan Morningfire said:

It sounds like part of the issue was that the original directors were doing multiple takes of every scene and figuring they'd "find the movie in the editing room," causing delays in production and subsequently jacking up the cost of the film.

Seeing as how Ron Howard was able to get the shots done in only a couple of takes, I suspect the major change will be keeping the directors on future films focused on getting the shots done in as few takes as possible, and not going all "artiste" and shooting scenes until they're "just right."

Yep. It’s my understanding that’s how Lord & Miller worked on the Jump Street movies. (Harder to do in animation like The LEGO Movie.) That approach was costing time, money, and (for better or for worse) made it tougher for LFL to really know what the movie was going to be (would it be what they hired them for or something completely different) and apply their usual marketing approach.

7 minutes ago, Nytwyng said:

Yep. It’s my understanding that’s how Lord & Miller worked on the Jump Street movies. (Harder to do in animation like The LEGO Movie.) That approach was costing time, money, and (for better or for worse) made it tougher for LFL to really know what the movie was going to be (would it be what they hired them for or something completely different) and apply their usual marketing approach.

Then they shouldn't have hired them. You don't hand $200 million to someone not knowing what they're going to do with your money. Added to the growing polka line of director, script, reshoot, story issues, it's clearly time for a change.

8 minutes ago, 2P51 said:

Then they shouldn't have hired them. You don't hand $200 million to someone not knowing what they're going to do with your money. Added to the growing polka line of director, script, reshoot, story issues, it's clearly time for a change.

No argument that they shouldn’t have hired them in the first place. I love The LEGO Movie. Their entire resumé being comedy isn’t really an issue, either (look at how the Russos have knocked it out of the park each time they’ve done a Marvel movie). But I don’t think their approach was right for “mainstream” Star Wars.

Seems like the initial decision-making process with directors is the biggest knot to untie.

29 minutes ago, Nytwyng said:

No argument that they shouldn’t have hired them in the first place. I love The LEGO Movie. Their entire resumé being comedy isn’t really an issue, either (look at how the Russos have knocked it out of the park each time they’ve done a Marvel movie). But I don’t think their approach was right for “mainstream” Star Wars.

Seems like the initial decision-making process with directors is the biggest knot to untie.

That is job 1 through 10 for what KK should be doing. I don't care about chopping heads off, but they need to insert a deputy or something in there to vette director/story more thoroughly than has been going on.

Speaking of the Russos, if they're all tidied up on Infinity War part deux, I'd be fine with them being handed an anthology movie.

30 minutes ago, 2P51 said:

That is job 1 through 10 for what KK should be doing. I don't care about chopping heads off, but they need to insert a deputy or something in there to vette director/story more thoroughly than has been going on.

Speaking of the Russos, if they're all tidied up on Infinity War part deux, I'd be fine with them being handed an anthology movie.

I’m willing to give her a pass on Trevorrow. All the accounts that I’ve read describe him as coming on board just fine, then letting the success of Jurassic World go to his head and turn him into a something of a tyrant.

Not sure what anyone was thinking with Lord & Miller, unless LFL was hoping they’d be another Russo brothers.

Who, I agree, I’d be glad to see direct a Star Wars Movie. I want to say that I’ve read rumors (so take it for what it’s worth) that LFL is interested in them, too.

On 6/1/2018 at 4:01 PM, DanteRotterdam said:

I even had a couple of EotE sessions based on it...

Same here except it was Dark Heresy rather than EotE.

On ‎5‎/‎25‎/‎2018 at 5:49 AM, Desslok said:

And Marcy is going to be so happy at the droid revolution. I think I would put it firmly in the middle of the pack, as far as the movies go.

Yeah, I think that's a plotline that's long overdue, considering how it's a staple of most sci-fi and SW has emotional droids with incredible depth of humanity... who then get treated poorly and passed over for medals. It was an obvious plot point when I set up my own game.

I thought the movie was... okay. I enjoyed it more because my expectations were absolutely zero. It was fun enough munching popcorn in the cinema, but it doesn't leave much impression afterwards. Donald Glover was good in it, and could probably carry his own movie. The rest was pretty forgettable.

It still baffles me, given that they specifically made their own new, shiny, 'Not Your Parent's Star Wars' era that they have such little interest in moving things forward. Why not tell us about the Scum and Villainy of the Force Awakens era? Why not give us new charming rogues and edgy outlaws? Why is everything always just regurgitated leftovers? Why not leave things to our imagination? The infamous Kessel Run was always more cool in my imagination than it could ever be on screen.

I note that the audience figures for the film were pretty mediocre. Maybe the film-makers will decide we need something more than reruns, reboots and retcons. Maybe they have a bit more faith in their new timeline and give us new creations, instead of mindlessly resurrecting garbage-tier characters like Darth Maul. Maybe they'll make a film that takes some risks, that has actual stakes, where we don't know who must live or die in advance.

But I doubt it. There's milk to be squeezed from the shrivelled nostalgia teat yet. ‘ So we beat on, boats against the current, borne endlessly into the past...’

They have a ton of new content planned though... The Favreau live-action series, the Weiss and Benioff Trilogy, likely the Rian Johnson trilogy, the Resistance-era starfighter animated series, etc.

2 hours ago, Maelora said:

It still baffles me, given that they specifically made their own new, shiny, 'Not Your Parent's Star Wars' era that they have such little interest in moving things forward. Why not tell us about the Scum and Villainy of the Force Awakens era? Why not give us new charming rogues and edgy outlaws? Why is everything always just regurgitated leftovers? Why not leave things to our imagination? The infamous Kessel Run was always more cool in my imagination than it could ever be on screen.

I think Rogue One and Solo are specifically aimed at the old-school fans. Hence the 'dark, gritty war movie' Star Wars fans have been calling for for ages, and the fanservicey film about an old favourite. And the Boba Fett film.

2 hours ago, Demon4x4 said:

They have a ton of new content planned though... The Favreau live-action series, the Weiss and Benioff Trilogy, likely the Rian Johnson trilogy, the Resistance-era starfighter animated series, etc.

True, and apart from the Resistance Era cartoon (set as a prequel of sorts toTFA) we really don't know in what time frame those other media are going to take place in.

Could well be that LFL is holding back on delving overly much into the sequel era until Episode 9 is released and the story of that trilogy concludes.

42 minutes ago, Donovan Morningfire said:

True, and apart from the Resistance Era cartoon (set as a prequel of sorts toTFA) we really don't know in what time frame those other media are going to take place in.

I believe Favreu has said that his series will be set a few years after RotJ.

On 6/4/2018 at 4:19 PM, Donovan Morningfire said:

And I think that's part of the issue, is that the more vitriolic members of the fanbase are trying to view Star Wars films (old and new) as high art films when the reality is that even the much beloved original films would collapse just as fast (if not faster) under the same degree of scrutiny that the newest films are being placed under.

I think Scott Alden of The Movie Defenders podcast put it best when he said that the main problem with the folks that are going out of their way to bash the new films is that they want the same kind of experience they had back when they were kids, but simply can't because they're no longer kids, and it pisses them off even if they can't or won't admit it to themselves.

So much this.

Had a huge conversation with a friend over coffee, and he was complaining that the films didn't capture the feeling he had as a kid. He wasn't near as critical as some of the more rabid individuals. He did say point blank, he was particularly upset about the way Luke was handled. His view, the movies should have been a continuation of the story of the characters we knew and loved as kids.

Personally, while I would have enjoyed it, a part of me would have always wondered what else they could have done.

Solo, while it does kind of give us some of what he was wanting, still fell a little flat for him.

Personally I've loved all the new movies, and I think Solo is my new favorite, not because it was Han, Chewie, and Lando, but more so it gave us a real glimpse into the side of the Star wars universe I really enjoy.

Here's some thoughts on if Solo's a bomb (not really) and what the expectations should have been (Why are we expecting Ant Man to do Avengers levels of money):

4 hours ago, Desslok said:

Why are we expecting Ant Man to do Avengers levels of money?

That's an excellent comparison.

Whether folks like it or not, we are living in an era where Star Wars is now an expanded cinematic universe, with films being made that fall outside the main story thread that is the Skywalker family drama.

Sadly, it seems the overly vocal, completely toxic, and utterly self-entitled part of the fandom are intent on ruining the experience for everyone, even going so far as to harass the actors and actresses over it. Case in point, Kelly Marie Tran has wiped her social media accounts due to all the hatred and bile that's been flung at her because of her role in TLJ. It's starting to reach a point where the folks that are still able to enjoy Star Wars want nothing to with a fandom that's got more toxic crap running through it than a badly-managed sewage treatment center.

27 minutes ago, Donovan Morningfire said:

That's an excellent comparison.

Whether folks like it or not, we are living in an era where Star Wars is now an expanded cinematic universe, with films being made that fall outside the main story thread that is the Skywalker family drama.

Sadly, it seems the overly vocal, completely toxic, and utterly self-entitled part of the fandom are intent on ruining the experience for everyone, even going so far as to harass the actors and actresses over it. Case in point, Kelly Marie Tran has wiped her social media accounts due to all the hatred and bile that's been flung at her because of her role in TLJ. It's starting to reach a point where the folks that are still able to enjoy Star Wars want nothing to with a fandom that's got more toxic crap running through it than a badly-managed sewage treatment center.

Indeed. I think how some people treat others over the new stuff is awful. That is why I am largely of the opinion that people should be held accountable for their actions on the internet, as all abuse and bulling crimes, just because one has the capability to express an opinion shouldn't give a person full rein to hurl abuse at another.

Then again, fan is short for fanatic; and I find any kind of extremist inexcusable.

21 minutes ago, LordBritish said:

Indeed. I think how some people treat others over the new stuff is awful. That is why I am largely of the opinion that people should be held accountable for their actions on the internet, as all abuse and bulling crimes, just because one has the capability to express an opinion shouldn't give a person full rein to hurl abuse at another.

Then again, fan is short for fanatic; and I find any kind of extremist inexcusable.

My friend Christopher West (aka the guy behind Maps of Mastery) said much the same on his Facebook wall just yesterday.

Honestly, I'm ready to just start calling myself a Star Wars aficionado and dispense with the whole "fan" given how fanatical some of those trogs have become in their hatred of anything that's "new" regarding Star Wars.

It seems that the more toxic elements of a lot of fandoms* are trying to shove their way to the front of the proverbial line and declare themselves the spokespeople for the entire fan base. We may even be finding ourselves close to the point that someone at LFL blatantly calls out the toxicity as Rick & Morty creator Dan Harmon has. We’ve started to see it with the response to Kelly Marie Tran scrubbing all of her social media thanks to Star Wars “fans.” How crazy is that? That landing a dream role in something like Star Wars becomes a nightmare?

Naturally, despite having a common touchstone, we’re not all going to agree, and that will almost inevitably lead to impassioned discussions. But that can still be done respectfully and without verbally assaulting someone for different tastes or for being a performer doing their job.

*I never really noticed when the term “fandom” began being used in its current context - as a self-identifier for groups - but I just can’t shake the feeling that it’s starting to gel with the toxic fans...that it’s becoming primarily the toxic ones who say, “(insert property here) is my fandom.” Or maybe I’m wrong. I dunno. Just a gut feeling.

On 6/3/2018 at 7:00 PM, Hercer said:

Why dont you guys use google translator and switch to german lets see how smart you sound talking in his main language. 

Wow. Du hast dir extra einen Account angelegt um dich selbst zu verteidigen? ?

Ich bin beeindruckt. Das ist so clever. Ändert aber nichts daran das es vollkommen Latte ist wie gut oder schlecht das Filmjahr ist, das Tomato-Meter ist eine Meta-Review Seite und der Score basiert auf professionellen Reviews, die User-Ratings kannst du in dort eh in die Tonne treten, weil sie sich nicht gegen Bots und Manipulation geschützt sind, siehe "The Last Jedi"

Besides, the DC Movies got bad ratings, because they really are that bad. ?
But don't take my word, enjoy an analysis of one of the movies which is longer than the whole movie. On top you see that an actual good movie like WW got great reviews, while the followup Justice League did not. Simply because it was again a bad movie. ?

2 hours ago, Nytwyng said:

It seems that the more toxic elements of a lot of fandoms* are trying to shove their way to the front of the proverbial line and declare themselves the spokespeople for the entire fan base.

It's because nobody slapped down GamerGate. They were the canary in this coalmine. Too many businesses responded as if GG was what it claimed to be (fans seeking accountability from big businesses) rather than what it was in practise (a campaign of harassment mostly targeting female staff employed by those businesses).

1 hour ago, SEApocalypse said:

Besides, the DC Movies got bad ratings, because they really are that bad. ?
But don't take my word, enjoy an analysis of one of the movies which is longer than the whole movie. On top you see that an actual good movie like WW got great reviews, while the followup Justice League did not. Simply because it was again a bad movie. ?

And WW wasn’t really all that good. It benefitted from lowered expectations and from not being quite as big of a mess as its predecessors in the franchise.