![]() |
Re: The General Star Wars Discussion Thread
I'm sold...
|
Re: The General Star Wars Discussion Thread
New rumors: Disney and LFL have been doing a hardcore restoration of the OT, as in going back to the actual original elements and re-scanning it all.
https://www.reddit.com/r/StarWarsLea...d_restoration/ Some are saying the screengrabs don't have the same flaws that even the 4K discs and such don't have, so they think it's real. We'll see, but the 50th is in 2027 so maybe we'll get a little something. |
Re: The General Star Wars Discussion Thread
Disney is probably ruining them further for the Vegas Sphere.
|
Re: The General Star Wars Discussion Thread
Originally Posted by milo bloom
(Post 14657182)
New rumors: Disney and LFL have been doing a hardcore restoration of the OT, as in going back to the actual original elements and re-scanning it all.
https://www.reddit.com/r/StarWarsLea...d_restoration/ Some are saying the screengrabs don't have the same flaws that even the 4K discs and such don't have, so they think it's real. We'll see, but the 50th is in 2027 so maybe we'll get a little something. |
Re: The General Star Wars Discussion Thread
Originally Posted by kefrank
(Post 14657241)
While I'd love for that to be true, I'm taking that rumor with the world's largest grain of salt for now.
|
Re: The General Star Wars Discussion Thread
I don't doubt for a second that Disney is doing this. Even if it's only for the sake of asset protection and not for the public, they'd be foolish not to. I am willing to believe that we will see whatever this is for the 50th anniversary, but I'm not going to waste any more energy speculating until we see something official. I spent too much time stressing over Star Wars in my younger years and I just don't care that much anymore.
|
Re: The General Star Wars Discussion Thread
Forbes just reported that the actual production budget for The Rise of Skywalker when it was filmed in 2018 was actually $593.7M
https://www.forbes.com/sites/carolin...s-600-million/ The UK, where this was filmed, has strict regulations on reporting the exact numbers The budgets of movies made in the United States are usually a closely-guarded secret as studios combine the cost of them in their overall expenses and don’t itemize how much was spent on each one. It's a different story in the U.K. Studios filming in the U.K. get a reimbursement of up to 25.5% of the money they spend in the country provided that at least 10% of the movie’s core costs are incurred there. In order to demonstrate this to the authorities, studios set up separate companies to produce each film in the U.K. and they are obliged to file legally-binding financial statements. As with all U.K. companies, these filings are released in stages long after the period they relate to. The process starts during pre-production and continues long after the premiere. There is good reason reason for this. It is revealed in the 2018 financial statements for the production company behind Star Wars spinoff Rogue One which state that "the company was involved in paying the ongoing production costs in relation to the film" even though it was released two years earlier. In short, the financial statements are compiled in stages over a long period of time in order to give the production team time to ensure that all the bills are paid. The filings are a goldmine of financial information as they reveal everything from the production’s overall cost and level of reimbursement right down to the headcount, salaries and even the social security payments to staff. They also reveal whether the movie cost more or less than the studio originally budgeted for it. The filings for the production company behind The Rise of Skywalker state that by March 2019, one month after filming wrapped, the movie was "in line with the budget". However, post-production cost less than expected and by the end of the year, less than two weeks after the movie debuted, it was "below the production budget". Although the reason for this isn’t certain, it coincided with the editing of the movie which took less time than usual. This came to light in an interview on The Rough Cut podcast with The Rise of Skywalker’s editor Maryann Brandon who admitted that the latter stages of the production schedule were accelerated which “affected everything.” She estimated that the crew had three months less to work on The Rise of Skywalker than The Force Awakens. Brandon explained that the reason for the tight timing was that Disney insisted on sticking to the movie’s December 2019 release date rather than delaying it which would have increased the post-production time and therefore the cost. Reshoots are often planned into budgets but J.J. Abrams, director of The Rise of Skywalker, told Entertainment Weekly that the movie ended up needing fewer than The Force Awakens. He explained that because The Force Awakens was the first movie in Disney's Star Wars series “we didn't know if these characters would work, if the actors would be able to carry a Star Wars movie. There were a lot of things we didn't know. On [The Rise of Skywalker], we knew who and what worked.” The cast of The Rise of Skywalker reads like a roll call for the Oscars. It reunited Mark Hamill and the late Carrie Fisher (through previously unreleased footage) with Ian McDiarmid who played their adversary, the evil Emperor, in the original Star Wars movies nearly 40 years earlier. In The Rise of Skywalker he teams up with Adam Driver's Kylo Ren to take on the remnants of the Resistance, with Daisy Ridley, John Boyega and Oscar Isaac in the leading roles. For Disney, the reduced reshoots and the accelerated post-production process was a force for good. If the movie had cost more to make, it would have reduced the studio’s profit. Calculating that requires knowledge of the amount Disney spent on the movie and the amount it generated from it. Disney banked a $103.8 million (£78.4 million) reimbursement for The Rise of Skywalker reducing its net spending on the picture to $489.9 million. Its returns largely come from its share of the movie’s $1.077 billion box office takings. The amount theaters pay to studios is known in the trade as a rental fee and an indication of the typical level comes from film industry consultant Stephen Follows who interviewed 1,235 film professionals in 2014 and concluded that, according to studios, theaters keep 49% of the takings on average. This research lends weight to the widely-established 50-50 split which would give Disney $538.5 million from The Rise of Skywalker and a $48.6 million profit at the box office. The share of the box office isn’t a studio’s only return from a movie so offsetting it from the costs in the financial statements does not show whether it made an overall profit or a loss. As a Disney spokesperson told this reporter last year, “there will be other income generated by the production (such as DVD/Blu Ray sales, merchandising, etc.). It’s not reflecting a true account of whether the film was overall profitable.” However, just as the production generates other income, it also incurs other costs, chief of which are the marketing expenses which are not shown in the financial statements of the production companies. Accordingly, if the home entertainment and merchandise sales should be added to the theater takings, the marketing cost should be deducted from them. Disney doesn’t disclose how much it spends on marketing each picture while the merchandise and streaming sales are tough to attribute to specific productions. A great deal of the former carries the overall Star Wars brand, rather than the names of specific movies and streaming viewers don't pay to watch each one of them. This casts a cloud of uncertainty over the movie’s overall bottom line even though it made a profit at the box office. One thing that's for sure is that this wasn't enough to make The Rise of Skywalker a force to be reckoned with as Star Wars has stayed off the silver screen since its debut. Instead, the series has been relegated to streaming shows with one of the most popular being The Mandalorian. Next year Star Wars will make its long-awaited return to theaters with the release of The Mandalorian & Grogu which follows up the streaming series. Time will tell whether it can bring back the magic or whether it is still far, far away. |
Re: The General Star Wars Discussion Thread
If you're going to blow $600 million on a movie, I would have thought they would have spent some of that on, you know, a better script.
Didn't help that they let J J Abrams and Rian Johnson shit all over the franchise with the first two sequel trilogy entries, so The Rise of Skywalker was probably a lost cause. It's just so weird to me that they're throwing all of this money at movies like this, but the actual story is, like, the an afterthought or the lowest priority. Could say the same thing for Dial of Destiny or most post-Phase III MCU projects. |
Re: The General Star Wars Discussion Thread
They brought in good people (like Kasdan) and they thought that with "modern" techniques, they'd be able to throw something together quickly. They didn't think about how George had kicked this story around in his head for years, that's what gave the story its weight.
They were damn foolish to not even consider anything from the books. Even if they ignored some major plot points (Chewbacca's status) they still could have pulled so much from the books and comics to give them ideas. |
Re: The General Star Wars Discussion Thread
Originally Posted by milo bloom
(Post 14657759)
They brought in good people (like Kasdan) and they thought that with "modern" techniques, they'd be able to throw something together quickly. They didn't think about how George had kicked this story around in his head for years, that's what gave the story its weight.
A big issue with the sequel trilogy is that Disney bought Lucasfilm and immediately announced the sequel trilogy and set release dates, before they had scripts. The movies were greenlit before they knew what the story was going to be. And then they wanted them out every 2 years, with a "standalone" movie in between each. Marvel could do concurrent productions because, aside from the Avengers, the stories from each film didn't have to directly feed into the next, only looser connections. But if you're making a 3-movie arc, you need to give it time to develop, either fully before filming, or at least between films, but Disney didn't want to give that space, to the point that it was literally impossible for one director to make all 3, even if they found someone that wanted to, because the productions were so tight they overlapped. Even Lucas gave himself 3 years between prequel films, and while those are crap, they're at least a consistent vision. Too often movie exacs just think they can take an established property and throw money at it, and make bank. It works far too often, at least on the money-making aspect. but Disney is finding out again this week with Tron: Ares, that even rabid fans can be discerning, and some bad entries can spoil a franchise.
Originally Posted by milo bloom
(Post 14657759)
They were damn foolish to not even consider anything from the books...
|
Re: The General Star Wars Discussion Thread
Jay G. said it. Lucas was just as guilty as anyone as far as making stuff up as he went along. The difference is that it was still mostly coming from one guy as opposed to multiple guys working independently of one another. He also had the freedom to take the story where he wanted to go without the weight of decades of lore and fan expectations.
And let's be honest. As much as I love the OT, the story is as minimalist as can be. The prequels got way more plotty and in many ways are just as dumb as the sequels. The difference is that it's at least a more consistent vision. |
Re: The General Star Wars Discussion Thread
They could have brought the kids from the books into play, half of them went to the dark side anyways (I think, I kinda faded away from reading them after a while).
They could have had a functioning (but still troubled) New Republic, that we actually see in action, not for two seconds on a planet we barely know the name of. Mara Jade and they could even reference the whole Dark Empire story. |
Re: The General Star Wars Discussion Thread
Originally Posted by milo bloom
(Post 14657782)
They could have brought the kids from the books into play, half of them went to the dark side anyways (I think, I kinda faded away from reading them after a while).
They could have had a functioning (but still troubled) New Republic, that we actually see in action, not for two seconds on a planet we barely know the name of. Mara Jade and they could even reference the whole Dark Empire story. What's an actual plotline they could've used? Name a novel, or a series of novels, that they could've used as a blueprint for a compelling story set 30 years after the original movies. |
Re: The General Star Wars Discussion Thread
Originally Posted by Jay G.
(Post 14657768)
George Lucas had to kick the original script around for years to have anything remotely workable, and that's after repeated feedback and some touch-ups by other people. For the sequels, George knew enough to take a step back and hire actual talented screenwriters while he became the "idea guy." For the sequels in the original Trilogy, they were making it up as they went, but at least having a consistent vision and some time to write a screenplay they were happy with. Those films were 3 years apart instead of 2, but that's a lot of extra time, especially considering how much less post production there was back then.
A big issue with the sequel trilogy is that Disney bought Lucasfilm and immediately announced the sequel trilogy and set release dates, before they had scripts. The movies were greenlit before they knew what the story was going to be. And then they wanted them out every 2 years, with a "standalone" movie in between each. Marvel could do concurrent productions because, aside from the Avengers, the stories from each film didn't have to directly feed into the next, only looser connections. But if you're making a 3-movie arc, you need to give it time to develop, either fully before filming, or at least between films, but Disney didn't want to give that space, to the point that it was literally impossible for one director to make all 3, even if they found someone that wanted to, because the productions were so tight they overlapped. Even Lucas gave himself 3 years between prequel films, and while those are crap, they're at least a consistent vision. Too often movie exacs just think they can take an established property and throw money at it, and make bank. It works far too often, at least on the money-making aspect. but Disney is finding out again this week with Tron: Ares, that even rabid fans can be discerning, and some bad entries can spoil a franchise. Like what? Specifically? People bring this up all the time, but only in a generality, and I've pointed out repeatedly that the "Legends" books were largely set 30 years earlier, and the original cast was far too old for those storylines when they started shooting the prequels. |
Re: The General Star Wars Discussion Thread
Originally Posted by rocket1312
(Post 14657778)
And let's be honest. As much as I love the OT, the story is as minimalist as can be. The prequels got way more plotty and in many ways are just as dumb as the sequels. The difference is that it's at least a more consistent vision.
I mean, you look at ANH, and it's just this really simple plot of "Luke gets caught up in some intrigue, leaves his home, rescues a princess, and saves the day by blowing up the Death Star." But it feels so much bigger than that. And then in ESB we have all of these new worlds, new space ships, bounty hunters, and it feels really expansive. Still a simple story -- our heroes flee their base during an attack by the Empire, Luke goes to train with a Jedi Master, Han and Leia flee to Bespin and are betrayed by an old friend, the stories converge when Luke arrives to rescue them and ends up battling Darth Vader and learns a terrible secret about himself. Boom-boom-boom -- three simple acts. Could Lucas have still kept that up with the prequels? Yeah, maybe. But it's interesting how so much of the world-building in the prequels backfired. You know, in ANH, when Luke and Ben walk into the Cantina, we're confronted with all of these aliens and creatures from dozens of different worlds, each with their own stories we aren't privy to, and it just fires the imagination. But when the Prequels try that with things like the Chosen One prophecy, Balancing the Force, and midichlorians, it just falls flat. I think the problem is that it's easier to fly by the seat of your pants in the first couple of entries, but when you start locking stuff down, the gods of the gaps get filled in, and you have a narrower frame to work in. |
Re: The General Star Wars Discussion Thread
Originally Posted by Jay G.
(Post 14657768)
Like what? Specifically? People bring this up all the time, but only in a generality, and I've pointed out repeatedly that the "Legends" books were largely set 30 years earlier, and the original cast was far too old for those storylines when they started shooting the prequels.
|
Re: The General Star Wars Discussion Thread
Originally Posted by Michael Corvin
(Post 14658232)
It was discussed. You can take concepts, characters, plots, plot devices, etc. and tweak them to work. It's what screenwriters get paid to do. There's 30 years of novels, games, comics, etc.,(from the minds of dozens and dozens of people) they had carte blanche to use or tweak any of it to work and they decided, "whatever JJ comes up with is what we're doing."
I'd probably loosely base it on the New Jedi Order series; take out the Yuuzhan Vong and save them for something like Legacy set a century or two into the future. The big bad would be something like Abeloth that the combined Skywalkers must defeat to balance the force. Then you go back and make an animated series (ala Clone Wars) that adapts things like the Thrawn Trilogy, Dark Empire, and Jedi Academy Trilogy to put them in line with the new Sequel Trilogy. |
Re: The General Star Wars Discussion Thread
My rage is incandescent:
https://variety.com/2025/film/news/a...ey-1236557455/ We could have had something amazing, but Bob Iger makes yet another mistake. If you want to share on social media, use the hashtags #bringbackbensolo and #savethehuntforbensolo |
Re: The General Star Wars Discussion Thread
Do you blame them after how horribly the 3rd movie was received by fans? I'd want to shut down that whole story arch, too.
|
Re: The General Star Wars Discussion Thread
Originally Posted by Noonan
(Post 14660566)
Do you blame them after how horribly the 3rd movie was received by fans? I'd want to shut down that whole story arch, too.
And they're making new Rey movies about her starting her own Jedi order. It would be very easy to weave this kind of story into that - the idea that Rey needs to help Ben settle his spirit since they're connected as a dyad in the Force. I would absolutely love to see this movie and it's already picking up steam on social media. Some are even comparing how Adam released this news to how Ryan Reynolds leaked the Deadpool footage to get the first movie made. |
Re: The General Star Wars Discussion Thread
If by met expectations you simply mean revenue, sure. It failed in literally every other way, and the fan backlash was loud enough to get people fired.
|
Re: The General Star Wars Discussion Thread
Yeah, no thank you to any more Emo Solo.
|
Re: The General Star Wars Discussion Thread
Yeah, that sounds pretty fucking terrible.
|
Re: The General Star Wars Discussion Thread
I thought he gave his life force to Rey so she could live... how would he be alive? -rolleyes-
|
Re: The General Star Wars Discussion Thread
Originally Posted by Meathead
(Post 14660681)
I thought he gave his life force to Rey so she could live... how would he be alive? -rolleyes-
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/dvdtalk...7326e7e39c.jpg |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:13 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.