Future Star Wars spinoffs on hold :(

[Unofficial Who]

7 minutes ago, Stigweard said:

 

I've seen you use them as your back up arguments many a times but I personally don't like their shtick

 

 

That I don't subscribe to YouTube influences or take their word as gospel. Unknown Who said "They're pretty much the most influential geek movie critics out there right now." But if you're (not you, people in general) letting some guys on YouTube influence what you do or don't like then that's pretty sad. I listen to certain movie review podcasts but never once have I let a critic I like influence me on my thoughts on a film, I've disagreed with them plenty of times.

 

Can I ask why Smitty is being taken to task for linking to videos when loads of other posters (including myself) do the same thing without being taken to task?

 

At least he's writing some content to go along with the videos which is more than what I do most times.

[Stig]

21 minutes ago, Unofficial Who said:

 

Can I ask why Smitty is being taken to task for linking to videos when loads of other posters (including myself) do the same thing without being taken to task?

 

At least he's writing some content to go along with the videos which is more than what I do most times.

 

Because his argument to K for why Rogue One was shit was a video of some unfunny guys shouting Star Wars words at the screen, like it meant something.

 

No doubt Smitty is an intelligent guy, I don't think anyone doesn't think that. He has great arguments in many things he writes (even if I completely disagree at times) but here what is there? What am I meant to get from a video of these guys that I didn't find funny or insightful? I'm asking is it meant to be funny or what?

[Unofficial Who]

7 minutes ago, Stigweard said:

 

Because his argument to K for why Rogue One was shit was a video of some unfunny guys shouting Star Wars words at the screen, like it meant something.

 

No doubt Smitty is an intelligent guy, I don't think anyone doesn't think that. He has great arguments in many things he writes (even if I completely disagree at times) but here what is there? What am I meant to get from a video of these guys that I didn't find funny or insightful? I'm asking is it meant to be funny or what?

 

I'm not a fan of RLM but it 's obvious that they're making fun of the Family Guy style of dropping cultural references en masse instead of delivering meaningful story content.

 

Edit : It's relevant and for most people really funny. (Most people may not include you or I )

[Stig]

 

4 minutes ago, Unofficial Who said:

Edit : It's relevant and for most people really funny. (Most people may not include you or I )

 

True

 

Anyway sorry for derailing the thread. It's a good thing they've pulled back on all these spins off. Put them on the back burner, sit down and come up with a proper plan, spread them out rather than 1 a year and come up with new stories away from the main core story and it's characters.

 

Also @Smitty I apologies, no idea why I was being snarky in this or the TLJ thread to be honest. Lets move on please.

[Smitty]

38 minutes ago, Stigweard said:

 

That I don't subscribe to YouTube influences or take their word as gospel. Unknown Who said "They're pretty much the most influential geek movie critics out there right now." But if you're (not you, people in general) letting some guys on YouTube influence what you do or don't like then that's pretty sad. I listen to certain movie review podcasts but never once have I let a critic I like influence me on my thoughts on a film, I've disagreed with them plenty of times.

 

????????????

 

What do you mean 'not you, people in general', you're obviously directing this at me. How are RLM influencing me, skip? Why do you think that liking any commentator is a matter of just subsuming their opinions into your own? That's not how it works.

 

What you're saying doesn't make any sense. Listening to and like movie review podcasts is no different to watching and liking RLM (or anyone else's) videos. You seem to think you can listen to critiques for entertainment and not be 'influenced' by them, but for some reason people who listen to critiques for entertainment that are made for a different medium aren't capable of doing that?

 

I've disagreed with RLM plenty of times. Mike rated the Jurassic Park reboot! I don't watch them because I agree with everything they say, I watch them because I know i'm always going to get an interesting and funny discussion of a movie. Whether or not I agree is neither here nor there, because i watch to be entertained.

 

Wow, weird. You think liking some funny movie critics on Youtube is like some sort of mind-control cult or something?

 

It's odd that this line of criticism continues to be a thing. If you don't like RLM that's obviously fine, but to start talking about people who are fans of literally any Youtube critics as being somehow under their nefarious 'influence' is bizarre, especially when the idea that being influenced by someone else is assumed to be a bad thing isn't even evidenced or justified.

 

Sorry to tell you but all of my opinions are my own.

 

This is an odd new genre of interpersonal criticism. No-one would post what you have in response to a, say, Mark Kermode video. It only really happens with very popular sources or very controversial sources.

 

I posted the video because I find it a very funny (it's also a send-up and not entirely representative of their actual opinions on the movie itself) way of illustrating my own opinion about the film. Obviously! But you're speaking as if I pointed to it as a source of objective truth, my 'gospel'.

 

This keeps happening in relation to RLM. It really is hilarious how angry they make some people when the show itself is a very light-hearted and often silly discussion of movies. But, oh no, they have different opinions to me! And they're popular - ON THE INTERNET! Oh my god!

[Stig]

*sigh*

 

Nevermind.

 

25 minutes ago, Smitty said:

 

????????????

 

What do you mean 'not you, people in general', you're obviously directing this at me. How are RLM influencing me, skip? Why do you think that liking any commentator is a matter of just subsuming their opinions into your own? That's not how it works.

 

 

It wasn't directed at you at all, it was directed towards UW  comment on saying they are influential. When I said "not you, people in general" it's because I used the word "you're" but it wasn't referring to you directly, it was referring to just people. I know you're not someone that subscribes to being told what to think or say, that's very evident.

 

[Darren]

53 minutes ago, NickC said:

I think going down the trilogy route is a better idea, honestly. They need to make sure they have them planned out a la the Marvel phases, with someone in charge who knows the universe and where things are headed.

 

Nothing will please some people of course, but it should make for more coherent films.

 

This is something that I've thought far too much about, and as anyone who reads the Star Wars novels thread knows, I think the Story Group do a brilliant job of keeping all the books, comics and other spin-offs heading in the same direction. When it all kicked off a few years ago I assumed they would be responsible for coming up with the overall storylines for the films too, but in practice I think they're more about ensuring continuity and making sure nothing contradicts anything else. But I think it would be better if there was someone (or a group of people) who were acting as showrunners, writing the broad-brush story and then parcelling it up for individual directors and authors to develop their episodes. Which was of course the model when George was in charge. The obvious catch is that the showrunners might decide to make a trilogy about midichlorians and trade routes, and we've seen where that ends up.

[PaB]

Shame. Solo was a really enjoyable film, as was Rogue One. I was looking forward to more. Still, can't hurt to take a breather.

[Unofficial Who]

Just now, PeteBrant said:

Shame. Solo was a really enjoyable film. I was looking forward to more. Still, can't help to take a breather.

 

Too many at once just spreads the material too thin and removes the mystery.

 

And we all know what happens when Star Wars is spread too thinly.

 

 

[Darren]

3 minutes ago, Unofficial Who said:

 

Too many at once just spreads the material too thin and removes the mystery.

 

And we all know what happens when Star Wars is spread too thinly.

 

 

I still can't understand why they didn't hold Solo back until December, to space it out from the other films. And I suspect it would have performed a lot better too.

[Stig]

5 minutes ago, Darren said:

 

I still can't understand why they didn't hold Solo back until December, to space it out from the other films. And I suspect it would have performed a lot better too.

 

Plus there isn't really a massive blockbuster films set for Xmas is there?

 

There's Bumblebee & Aquaman. It would have done fine against those, but now it's been lost between Avengers, Deadpool & Jurassic World

[Smitty]

26 minutes ago, Stigweard said:

*sigh*

 

Nevermind.

 

No worries. I started writing that post before you replied and it took me a little while.

[PaB]

16 minutes ago, Darren said:

 

I still can't understand why they didn't hold Solo back until December, to space it out from the other films. And I suspect it would have performed a lot better too.

Yeah, plus releasing it the same week as Deadpool 2 and right after Infinity War was nuts. Also,  It's amazing how many people i know said "oh? is that out now?" when I told them I went to see Solo.

[Paulando]

Solo would have performed a lot better at Christmas I’m sure. Christmas is ‘Star Wars in the cinema’ time for us. I had opening night IMAX tickets booked for TFA, Rogue One and TLJ, but I didn’t bother with Solo.

 

I imagine it also suffered from the widely reported production problems (we’d have probably forgotten about those by December), and actually quite a dull premise, which was its biggest crime. Can’t say I’d be excited about an Obi-Wan film either.

 

I reckon Kathleen Kennedy will be replaced. They severely misjudged what people actually want to see, and fucked up with their choice of directors (either go with Gareth Edwards and The Lego Movie guys and let them do their thing, or don’t).

[Jammy]

13 minutes ago, Paulando said:

I reckon Kathleen Kennedy will be replaced. They severely misjudged what people actually want to see, and fucked up with their choice of directors (either go with Gareth Edwards and The Lego Movie guys and let them do their thing, or don’t).

There are already rumours online that she’ll be gone in September.

[footle]

4 hours ago, Black Cat Supremacist said:

Hopefully JJ can do something with the current trilogy after the pile of shit he has been left with in regard to The Last Jedi. I’m not sure anyone could manage to steer a sequel to that in any decent direction. 

 

Star Wars needing a reboot / rethink already is absolutely mental.

 

New Star Trek was the exact same. A very promising first introductory film to get the whole thing going again and then subsequent movies fell off a cliff.

 

TLJ was MUCH more interesting than the pitiful replay of the original film that TFA was. I don’t have much confidence for Episode 9, but that’s because JJ hasn’t actually managed to bring any story to a successful and satisfying conclusion in his life.

[JPL]

All you lot making excuses for Star Wars having to go up against those other films, have you ever thought ‘this is Star Wars, it should absolutely steamroller any other film’? Just shows how irrelevant it’s becoming.

[womblingfree]

5 hours ago, Smitty said:

 

 

Come on K, Rogue One!?

 

 

 

Another vote for Rogue One here. Much as I love the RLM guys, I completely disagree with their take on it.

[mdn2]

I fucking love Rogue One. It's my favourite of all the four new films. 

[Smitty]

44 minutes ago, womblingfree said:

 

Another vote for Rogue One here. Much as I love the RLM guys, I completely disagree with their take on it.

 

BOOO! Booo!

 

The one thing i'll give it is that it looks and sounds incredible. Oh my god, those shots of the Death Star rising over the horizon. Visually, won-der-ful. It's just....the rest of the movie.

 

[Smitty]

5 hours ago, Mr Cochese said:

It's Rouge One.

 

The good old NTSC-UK days!

 

[macosx]

the days of the Saurian scart cables.

[Kevvy Metal]

33 minutes ago, macosx said:

the days of the Saurian scart cables.

 

I sold mine for like £30, and now that I've got a SONY PVM and all my retro shit organised, I so wish I had never sold it. 

[macosx]

17 minutes ago, Kevvy Metal said:

 

I sold mine for like £30, and now that I've got a SONY PVM and all my retro shit organised, I so wish I had never sold it. 

i'll have a look, if I can find it you can have it

[Kevvy Metal]

4 minutes ago, macosx said:

i'll have a look, if I can find it you can have it

 

That would be more than lovely!

 

[Kevvy Metal]

Cancelled Anthology films is likely hear'say. 

Everything on the internet is true of course! 

 

 

[Jug McKenzie]

Yep! Turns out all that happened was they cancelled / postponed a Mos Eisley spin-off that we didn’t even know they’d been working on (and will probably still turn up eventually anyway). Yippee!

[mushashi]

So ABC news, another arm of the Disney corporation is reporting that their sources tell them the original rumour is bullshit essentially, but the official comment is rather ambiguous if you read the actual text, which certainly leaves plenty of wriggleroom for the truth. We'll find out over the next few years which source is accurate with what films they choose to release, as they have to put at least one out on a yearly basis.

 

Quote

 

Reports of the death of future standalone films from that galaxy far, far away (like "Solo," "Rogue One" and a rumored -- but never-announced -- Obi-Wan Kenobi project) appear to be premature, and speculative at best. 

 

Lucasfilm sources on Thursday characterized as "inaccurate" a report that future "Star Wars" movies falling outside of the regular trilogy storyline (Episodes I to IX) have been put on hold in the wake of the box office under-performance of "Solo: A Star Wars Story."

 

Instead, Lucasfilm told ABC News there are still "multiple" Star Wars films currently in development that have not been officially announced. Those projects are moving forward separate from an already-announced "Star Wars" trilogy being overseen by "The Last Jedi" director Rian Johnson and another series of movies from "Game of Thrones" producers David Benioff and D.B. Weiss. 

 

 

https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Culture/multiple-films-star-wars-pipeline-sources/story?id=56057987

 

If it was never officially alive, it can't be dead.

 

[Darren]

[NickC]

Therm Scissorpunch: Rebel Chef saved