Star Wars ep. VII ... Who's Hyped?

[Huey]

I was a ten year old when the original came out and saw it for 54 weeks in a row every Saturday at my local theater I was such a fan. Loved Empire and hated Return of the Jedi. Hated ewoks with a vengeance. Was excited when the prequels came out but like most of you was socked at how bad they were. Thou I loved Darth Maul and felt he should've lived thru all three movies.

Will wait a week to see this as the first weekend will be insane.

You should watch the animated show Clone Wars if you like Darth Maul. I think all of the episodes, including an unaired last season are on Netflix. The last season they aired was really good and included a Darth Maul story arc which was really interesting.

 

[Yesfan70]

I was a ten year old when the original came out and saw it for 54 weeks in a row every Saturday at my local theater I was such a fan. Loved Empire and hated Return of the Jedi. Hated ewoks with a vengeance. Was excited when the prequels came out but like most of you was socked at how bad they were. Thou I loved Darth Maul and felt he should've lived thru all three movies.

Will wait a week to see this as the first weekend will be insane.

You should watch the animated show Clone Wars if you like Darth Maul. I think all of the episodes, including an unaired last season are on Netflix. The last season they aired was really good and included a Darth Maul story arc which was really interesting.

I've watched a few episodes here and there with my son, who likes it. I'm confused about Darth Maul. Where's the series in relation to the SW timeline? Darth Maul dies shortly after he kills Qui-Gon Ginn in TPM, but the Clone Wars series focuses more on Obi-Won and Anakain leading the fight against the Separatists, which makes me think the series is in around after Ep2 AotC.

On another note, where does Star Wars Rebels reside in the timeline? Is it between episodes 3-4?

 

[Huey]

Yes, The Clone Wars take place between movies 2 and 3, and Rebels takes place after movie 3. It does get confusing at times, trying to keep the timeline straight. And somehow I was able to watch Rebels last year, but can't get it this season. Which is too bad, because it's pretty good.

 

[Botch]

I told you, I told you!!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yo7_qW4pPrc[/youtube]

Coming thisa Christmas!! :banana-dance: :banana-dance: :banana-dance:

 

[Yesfan70]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWaLxFIVX1s[/youtube]



If this movie turns out really good, I won't complain if Disney wants to redo ep 1-3.................. :eusa-whistle:

 

[Batman]

As bad as episodes 1-3 are, I can't imagine them redoing them. The stories are SO bad there's no reason to "redo" them unless they're willing to rewrite what is now considered canon as far as the film universe is concerned. I just can't see them doing that under any circumstances.

 

[Yesfan70]

As bad as episodes 1-3 are, I can't imagine them redoing them. The stories are SO bad there's no reason to "redo" them unless they're willing to rewrite what is now considered canon as far as the film universe is concerned. I just can't see them doing that under any circumstances.

I don't expect them to redo them for the reasons you mentioned. PLus, I think fans would be turned off by yet another version to buy on home video. All I'm saying is, I won't complain if they did redo them.


I'll say this.....if Jar-Jar, for whatever reason, happens to be in ep 7, then I think I'll just throw in the towel. Granted, the Marvel movies have been very enjoyable, so I don't think Disney would eff up the new SW movie by having Jar-Jar return.

 

[Botch]

mmmmkay, then how about this?

:happy-smileygiantred:

 

[Deacon]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pU6B2zEFeg[/youtube]

 

[Randy]

As bad as episodes 1-3 are, I can't imagine them redoing them. The stories are SO bad there's no reason to "redo" them unless they're willing to rewrite what is now considered canon as far as the film universe is concerned. I just can't see them doing that under any circumstances.

I watched a bit of "the Phantom Menace" but I basically haven't seen episodes 1-3. Just wasn't interested. I loved the original trilogy.

Episode 7 I will probably watch though.

 

[Akula]

I always thought Episodes II and III got a bit of a bum rap. Yeah, Episode I does NOTHING for the story- basically, they find Anakin and take him into Jedi training. That's it. Something we already knew about. Otherwise, it's crap about a trade deal gone bad, some outlaw race complete with betting, and screwing up the notion of the Force with midichlorian nonsense.

The next two do get into more useful stuff, have better action, and despite the wooden acting of the main characters, can be enjoyable. If you like lightsaber fights and exploding spaceships, they're worth a watch. As good as the original film and Empire Strikes Back? Of course not. But maybe a stone's throw from Return of the Jedi (which had way better acting but still had its own stupid crap).

 

[Yesfan70]

I always thought Episodes II and III got a bit of a bum rap. Yeah, Episode I does NOTHING for the story- basically, they find Anakin and take him into Jedi training. That's it. Something we already knew about. Otherwise, it's crap about a trade deal gone bad, some outlaw race complete with betting, and screwing up the notion of the Force with midichlorian nonsense.

The next two do get into more useful stuff, have better action, and despite the wooden acting of the main characters, can be enjoyable. If you like lightsaber fights and exploding spaceships, they're worth a watch. As good as the original film and Empire Strikes Back? Of course not. But maybe a stone's throw from Return of the Jedi (which had way better acting but still had its own stupid crap).

I totally agree. I don't think they hold a candle to the original trilogy, but they are very entertaining. Jar-Jar was the biggest issue for me, but he's no different than the Ewoks in Return either.

 

[Kazaam]

Ewoks were way better than Jar Jar!

Ok... Yeah... Ewoks were pretty stupid, too. I'll admit.

Wasn't there an Ewoks cartoon on Satuday mornings for a short while?

 

[Towen7]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pU6B2zEFeg[/youtube]

Extremely cool!

I need to watch more of these.

 

[Deleted member 133]

I got 37 seconds into the clip and stopped when it claimed that young Kurosawa was exposed to American Westerns, and John Ford in particular, in 1910. Ford's first film, the 30 minute The Tornado, was not until 1917. (And why the need for the narrator to go gangsta at this point "You know, like John Ford films and shit.")

But I started watching again and this time got as far as 51 seconds when I could take no more. Of course the younger Kurosawa was watching silent films at this supposed time - there wasn't anything else! "You see at the time, silent films were still popular in Japan" says the narrator. Well d'uh!

Did not get past that point. By then any chance of me finding anything to come believable or credible was shot.

Jeff

 

[Huey]

Rumor has it, and there are a lot of rumors out there so take it for what it's worth, but there is a major character that is going to be killed off in the new movie.

 

[Towen7]

I got 37 seconds into the clip and stopped when it claimed that young Kurosawa was exposed to American Westerns, and John Ford in particular, in 1910. Ford's first film, the 30 minute The Tornado, was not until 1917. (And why the need for the narrator to go gangsta at this point "You know, like John Ford films and shit.")

But I started watching again and this time got as far as 51 seconds when I could take no more. Of course the younger Kurosawa was watching silent films at this supposed time - there wasn't anything else! "You see at the time, silent films were still popular in Japan" says the narrator. Well d'uh!

Did not get past that point. By then any chance of me finding anything to come believable or credible was shot.

Jeff

I'm failing to see what's got you bothered Jeff.

I went back and re-watched because it seemed like there was an awful lot of effort put into that video to be so factually wrong. The narrator says that he took his son, Akira Kurasawa, to see Jon Ford films and shit. Wikipedia says that Akira Kurosawa was born in 1910 so... seeing a John Ford film at age 7 seems perfectly logical.

Regarding the availability of "talkies". Again, Akira Kurasawa was born in 1910 and talkies began in 1927. That would mean that beginning around age 17 talkies were available though surely not wide-spread in Japan. Citing Wikipedia again, Akira's brother (the silent film narrator) killed himself in 1933, during a time that many silent film narrators could not find work due to the popularity of talkies. Akira didn't get into the "film industry" until 1935. That means that during Akira's film watching life until that point (age 17-25) he'd have seen a mix of some talkies along with the silent films. It's not a far leap to assume that he watched more silent films than was typical during the rush to adopt talkies.

 

[Deleted member 133]

I got 37 seconds into the clip and stopped when it claimed that young Kurosawa was exposed to American Westerns, and John Ford in particular, in 1910. Ford's first film, the 30 minute The Tornado, was not until 1917. (And why the need for the narrator to go gangsta at this point "You know, like John Ford films and shit.")

But I started watching again and this time got as far as 51 seconds when I could take no more. Of course the younger Kurosawa was watching silent films at this supposed time - there wasn't anything else! "You see at the time, silent films were still popular in Japan" says the narrator. Well d'uh!

Did not get past that point. By then any chance of me finding anything to come believable or credible was shot.

Jeff

I'm failing to see what's got you bothered Jeff.

I went back and re-watched because it seemed like there was an awful lot of effort put into that video to be so factually wrong. The narrator says that he took his son, Akira Kurasawa, to see Jon Ford films and shit. Wikipedia says that Akira Kurosawa was born in 1910 so... seeing a John Ford film at age 7 seems perfectly logical.

Regarding the availability of "talkies". Again, Akira Kurasawa was born in 1910 and talkies began in 1927. That would mean that beginning around age 17 talkies were available though surely not wide-spread in Japan. Citing Wikipedia again, Akira's brother (the silent film narrator) killed himself in 1933, during a time that many silent film narrators could not find work due to the popularity of talkies. Akira didn't get into the "film industry" until 1935. That means that during Akira's film watching life until that point (age 17-25) he'd have seen a mix of some talkies along with the silent films. It's not a far leap to assume that he watched more silent films than was typical during the rush to adopt talkies.

Tom,

Here's the first bit of text, in its entirety: "Let's rewind. 1910 Japan. A schoolteacher named Ikamu Kurosawa skips out on Japanese films and takes his son Kira to see American Westerns instead; you know, like John Ford films and shit." So in 1910, there were no John Ford films, and, as you so aptly pointed out, there was barely any Akira either, since he was born that year. The narrator says 1910. Not some other later year. If he meant "as a 7 year old" then he should have said so.

Re the second bit, here's the text: "In addition to a steady diet of Westerns, Akira also watches silent films. You see at the time.." The implication is that somehow Westerns and silent films were somehow two different beasts when in fact the former is just a subset of the latter "at the time." If the narration really meant to say "even with the onset of talkies, Akira continued to watch silent Western films, you know, that John Ford and shit stuff, because of this this little guy..." then it should have said so.

Regards.

Jeff

ps. I believe that Kurosawa is an elite member of Andrew Sarris' pantheon. From Wiki: "Sarris lists what he termed the "pantheon" of the 14 greatest film directors who had worked in the United States. The list includes the Americans Robert Flaherty, John Ford, D. W. Griffith, Howard Hawks, Buster Keaton, and Orson Welles; the Germans Fritz Lang, Ernst Lubitsch, F. W. Murnau, Max Ophüls, and Josef von Sternberg; the British Charles Chaplin, Alfred Hitchcock; and the French Jean Renoir." Since Kurosawa did eventually work in America, and given his body of work, he certainly belongs.

 

[malsackj]

yes hyped and ready for the Blueray !

 

[Flint]

Spoke to a friend in the industry yesterday....

Apparently this movie needs to gross over $1B in ticket sales before the end of the year AND generate over $10B in sales next year just to justify the investment Disney has put into it (cost of movie, buying Lucasfilm, advertising, etc.).

So, we will read about record revenues for this.movie, but Disney could still call it a financial failure.