From: YourName@YourISP.com

In article , Cyber kNight
 wrote:

> Your Name wrote on Wed, 01 October 2014 21:16
>
> >>  there now (although not Rick McCallum). Others who have
been involved in
> >>  past Star Wars films (e.g. Lawrence Kasdan who co-wrote
Empire Strikes
> >>  Back, Return of the Jedi and Raiders of the Lost Ark)
are also involved in
> >>  the new films. It's not like there is no continuity.
>
> >Continuity or lack of it remains to be seen, but will
almost certainly
> >become a problem as more and more people are introduced to
try and
> >insert their own ideas into the franchise. In fact, Disney
has already
> >thrown out all previous non-movie material (some for the
better) and
> >started they own line of continuity.
>
> There is at least some continuity in terms of people working
on the films.
> That much is a fact.
>
> >>  So why assume the worst?
>
> >Because past experience of Hollyweird has shown that the
worst is what
> >happens. Thanks to the "reboot" fad infesting Hollyweird,
many
> >franchises have already been butchered into a confused mess
by some new
> >fool who believed they knew better than the creator what
the franchise
> >"should have been".
>
> But it has already been established that these films are not
a 'reboot' but
> sequels. Aside from Trek (which WAS a reboot)
which franchises to you feel
> have been butchered?

JJ Abrams so-called "Star Trek" movies are marketed as a continuation,
although they are in fact really a silly "reboot". What terms they use
to describe any new material doesn't actually  prevent ill-fitting
changes being made by new people ... especially over-egoed people like
JJ Abrams who think they know better what the franchise "should have
been".

The phrase "jumping the shark" was coined because TVs suddenly changed
in some way(s) - these weren't sequles or "reboots".



> >>  And George Lucas is also reportedly collaborating on the
new films.
>
> >No. George Lucas is an honorary adisor. He has absolutely
no legal say
> >in what can and cannot happen - that is now the decision of
JJ Abrams,
> >and Disney and Lucasfilm management.
>
> Legal say or no he is still collaborating. I doubt that he
would do so if
> they are simply going to ignore everything he
says.

No, George Lucas is advising ... *if* asked. It is mostly an honourary
position and he has no legal say in what does or doesn't happen.

JJ Abrams could ask George Lucas if he thinks the new movie should
include a four-hour graphic X-rated sex scene. George Lucas would say
"no, of course not", but JJ Abrams could still include it anyway simply
because that's what he thinks the franchise "should be".



> >>  Again, why assume the new movies will be 'ill-fitting
rubbish'?
>
> >Again, Hollywierd's past performance in many other
franchises.
>
> >>  The prequel trilogy was mediocre at best when compared
with the original,
> >>  regardless of how well it 'fit in'.
>
> >The quality is irrelevent to the point. "Quality" is an
opinion and as
> >such everybody has a different one.
> >
> >Conintuity and fitting into the existing franchise are
facts, and it is
> >that continuity that makes a successful franchise. That
continuity is
> >not just the general in-universe facts, but also includes
such things
> >as the style of the movies..
>
> I certainly want the new movies to fit in with the
established movies but...
> Quality may be "opinion" but there is often a general
consensus that is
> indicative of the quality.

Quality is completely irrelevant to the point. Whether any additions
are "good" or "bad" doesn't stop them fillting or not with the
established franchise.




> Most people
don't feel that the sequel trilogy
> lived up to the original
regardless of whether they liked it or not. Quality
> is even
more important than fitting in (in my opinion). I would
rather have a
> good movie that changes the continuity or is a
'reboot' that a crap movie
> that 'fits in' if I had to choose
between the two.

Then you aren't a true "fan" of the franchise, as defined by the
meaning of the word. A true fan actually likes something THE WAY IT IS
and does not want idiotic ill-fitting changes turning it into something
very different.



> At this point we have every reason to believe these movies
will fit in with
> the established movies. They are using
original actors in a sequel for
> goodness sakes.

At this point we know nothing at all about the movie itself.

We do that the first new movie is being helmed by an egotistical hack
who claims to be a "fan" and decided the original storyline wasn't good
enough, so re-wrote it himself. We also know that JJ Abrams has already
butchered the Star Trek franchise with his silly new movie that pee'd
all over existing continuity (and tried to use the silly excuse of an
alternate timline to get around that ... and failed miserably due to
many reasons of being ill-fitting).

There are also many other pointers that lead to the good *possibility*
that this will be an ill-fitting movie with ridiculous changes that
destroys another franchise ... or to quote many STar Wars characters:
"I have a bad feeling about this."



> >A new movie which is a musical (for example) would be
ill-fitting to
> >the franchise, no matter how "good" or "bad" it is in
anybody's
> >individual opinions. There are many now-adult fans who want
a "grown up
> >Star Wars", which is also out of context and ill-fitting
with the Star
> >Wars franchise which is and has always been aimed mainly at
young boys
> >aged approximately 7-15.
>
> I'll bet good money that the new movies will be PG or PG-13
and will not be
> musicals.

That was simply one example. There are many ways in which idiotic
changes can mean any new material is ill-fitting with the franchise.



> >>  These movies aren't a 'reboot' like the Trek movies and
at this point I
> >>  don't think we have any reason to believe they won't
'fit' with the
> >>  established (movie) franchise. What other franchises are
you referring to?
> >
> >Lucasfilm owns many franchises, the two biggest of course
being Star
> >Wars and Indiana Jones.
>
> I was referring to franchises that have sequels that you feel don't 'fit in'.

Pretty much everything Hollyweird has "resurrected" has been
ill-fitting and butchered the original franchise ... whether it's given
a label a "sequel", "prequel", "reboot" or anything else isn't
relevant.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
 * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)