Red Mosquito

Rangi Guy wrote:

stip wrote:

Rangi Guy wrote:As long as they can market toys I'm sure the studio is going to be happy. These days the film itself seems to be a secondary consideration

is there any evidence at all that this is a thing?

The Force Awakens

I believe the merchandise alone made Disney their money back after buying Star Wars.

stip wrote:

Rangi Guy wrote:As long as they can market toys I'm sure the studio is going to be happy. These days the film itself seems to be a secondary consideration

is there any evidence at all that this is a thing?

No.

Rangi Guy wrote:

stip wrote:

Rangi Guy wrote:As long as they can market toys I'm sure the studio is going to be happy. These days the film itself seems to be a secondary consideration

is there any evidence at all that this is a thing?

The Force Awakens

in what way? what was shoehorned into TFA for merchandise purposes? really these differences come doen to what kind of story a star wars story should be. it seems to me to be, at root, a debate about whether to adopt a safer/classicist vision, or one with far more loosely defined boundaries.

and of course money is at stake, but it is a question of what kind of story will speak to the largest number of people.

stip wrote:but it is a question of what kind of story will speak to the largest number of people.

run2death wrote:

stip wrote:but it is a question of what kind of story will speak to the largest number of people.

Star Wars: Force the Barf

A whole lot of previous artists in this thread.

run2death wrote:

stip wrote:but it is a question of what kind of story will speak to the largest number of people.

For real

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

run2death wrote:

stip wrote:but it is a question of what kind of story will speak to the largest number of people.

For real

Stip is right, and people speak with their wallets. That's the bottom line.

Star Wars films, all of them have to cater to everyone but especially the totally casual audience. That's why you see the design language remaining true throughout. It's also why they do little call backs and nods. The hardcore fanbase are probably only 5% of the return. Tops. If they truly ever decided to make a Star Wars film for that 5% hardcore there's a good chance it wouldn't be successful at all with the public at large.

This Han movie comes kinda close to that. But I've a feeling the Obi Wan film will go full tilt at it.

Thinking about it it probably would have been better to do Han first then Obi Wan and finish out the stand alone trilogy with Rogue one. But here we are.

Sgt. Crackpot wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

run2death wrote:

stip wrote:but it is a question of what kind of story will speak to the largest number of people.

For real

Stip is right, and people speak with their wallets. That's the bottom line.

Precisely

But these two things don't need to be mutually exclusive

Again, you guys are talking about corporate strategies here. I don't know why anyone would side with those interests unless they don't care about art or personality or idiosyncrasy or humanity or

That's not what I'm siding with. I'm siding with a vision of star wars that I prefer, and because I, like many people, prefer it, it is what the studio is backing. If the last two movies were shit, or if this was something like Transformers that I thought was terrible, I would feel differently. The corporate strategy wants to make money off the movies, but they'll make that money by telling stories that people find emotionally resonant with characters and images that stay with people. It's why I own the new movies on blu ray and don't give a shit about owning the prequels.



I don't know why anyone would side with those interests unless they don't care about art or personality or idiosyncrasy or humanity or

In this particular case the studio sided with one particular vision about art, personality, idosyncrasy, humanity (Lawrence Kasden's vision) over another (L+Ms)

stip wrote:That's not what I'm siding with. I'm siding with a vision of star wars that I prefer, and because I, like many people, prefer it, it is what the studio is backing. If the last two movies were shit, or if this was something like Transformers that I thought was terrible, I would feel differently. The corporate strategy wants to make money off the movies, but they'll make that money by telling stories that people find emotionally resonant with characters and images that stay with people. It's why I own the new movies on blu ray and don't give a shit about owning the prequels.



I don't know why anyone would side with those interests unless they don't care about art or personality or idiosyncrasy or humanity or

In this particular case the studio sided with one particular vision about art, personality, idosyncrasy, humanity (Lawrence Kasden's vision) over another (L+Ms)

Screenwriters almost never bring vision. And I don't think Disney was siding with Kasdan anyway.

TFA isn't even a speck of shit on the bottom of Transformers' boot.

LoathedVermin72 wrote:I know you're just following orders, dime

stip wrote:

Rangi Guy wrote:

stip wrote:

Rangi Guy wrote:As long as they can market toys I'm sure the studio is going to be happy. These days the film itself seems to be a secondary consideration

is there any evidence at all that this is a thing?

The Force Awakens

in what way? what was shoehorned into TFA for merchandise purposes? really these differences come doen to what kind of story a star wars story should be. it seems to me to be, at root, a debate about whether to adopt a safer/classicist vision, or one with far more loosely defined boundaries.

and of course money is at stake, but it is a question of what kind of story will speak to the largest number of people.

Captain Phasma.

LoathedVermin72 wrote:Again, you guys are talking about corporate strategies here. I don't know why anyone would side with those interests unless they don't care about art or personality or idiosyncrasy or humanity or

I get it. You don't like having new Star Wars trilogy. But wtf is transformers? Your arguments against Star Wars can easily be turned on transformers but you love the director.

Be real here mr.

Strat wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:Again, you guys are talking about corporate strategies here. I don't know why anyone would side with those interests unless they don't care about art or personality or idiosyncrasy or humanity or

I get it. You don't like having new Star Wars trilogy. But wtf is transformers? Your arguments against Star Wars can easily be turned on transformers but you love the director.

Be real here mr.

Not really. Like it or not, Transformers is unapologetically Michael Bay's vision. That's the main reason so many people hate it. But it is his. It's all him. And I love that.

And its so so so awful. And toys