[NGTM-1R]

So will George have anything at all to do with this movie or is he retiring or something?

He's "creative consultant" but that's all, or you could try reading the first page of the thread!

[Veers]

He's now a creative consultant or something.. all I know is that he would 'advise' them, and they don't have to listen at all.

Personally, this can go good (good being.. better than prequels)... or very very bad. Disney stands to make a tonne of $$$ with merch for a new generation which would like the newer films regardless of if they are good or not (from our view).

I'd like to see Thrawn, but chances of that happening a next to nil. And my next thought runs to the 501st Legion, if this could mean anything changes for them. But as they (we) do charity work. It would cause quite stir.

[Sandwich]

I just heard about this myself. I don't shock easily, but I'm pretty sure I'm in shock.

[SpardaSon21]

Nathan Fillion as Han Solo.  I don't see how that role would be any different from say, Malcolm Reynolds.

[deathfun]

Nathan Fillion as Han Solo.  I don't see how that role would be any different from say, Malcolm Reynolds.

I actually smiled at this

[Flipside]

The thing about Disney is that it is an umbralla corp, as has been mentioned before, it acquired Pixar and it has now acquired Lucasfilm. Personally, I think we are facing a LoTR moment. If the project is handed to someone who genuinely wants to bring the best possible experience to the screen and is willing to tell George Lucas to get off his merchandise-obsessed high-horse, then great things could happen. But, like Lord of the Rings, for all it's critical acclaim, the audience that it was not aimed at really do not understand it.

If Disney target the lowest common denominator, as Lucas did, then it will be crap, if they give the production rights to someone who has a genuine affection for the Universe, something I think Lucas lost between the two sets of movies, then you could end up with a great film, but the risk factor is higher, especially after the dire reception of the prequels.

[BloodEagle]

Why are you guys arguing about movies and the expanded universe?  This is about neither.

#1. There's no way that a single (hell, several) movie will ever produce enough profit to justify that price tag.

#2. Disney will likely not go with any existing story in the expanded universe (for a large number of reasons).

This is all about merchandising.

Also, I predict massive changes to MGM Studios (or whatever they're calling it nowadays).

[Sandwich]

Nathan Fillion as Han Solo.  I don't see how that role would be any different from say, Malcolm Reynolds.

Actually, saw a movie recently where the star reminded me quite a bit of Han Solo. The movie was Lockout, and the actor was Guy Pearce. He was confident, snarky, rough-n-tumble, and not "clean" in appearance.

[Scourge of Ages]

#1. There's no way that a single (hell, several) movie will ever produce enough profit to justify that price tag.

This is all about merchandising.

It couldn't be ALL about selling toys. Because as far as I know, the deal includes Skywalker Sound and ILM, which are used in so many huge movies there's a constant cash flow there, plus it'll make production of future Marvel movies cheaper since they're now technically "in-house". Also the games, and any TV shows besides the Clone Wars and that live-action one that's been wafting about.

I'm not denying that merchandising isn't a huge part of it, since it obviously is, but the deal means so many streams of revenue besides that.

[Flipside]

Personally, I'd have been a lot happier if Time Warner had got their hands on Lucasfilm, rather than Disney, I think they could have done wonderful things with the Star Wars Universe, but we will wait any see, Disney know that TW have the market cornered when it comes to 'serious' interpretations of fantasy, and after their disastrous outing with John Carter, they may realise that they need to challenge this or lose a rather large section of the market. That said, after their success with the Avengers, they also have reason to keep on pushing the Popcorn-munching pyrotechnics that requires minimum thought.

[sigtau]

The Avengers was the ultimate comic book movie, Michael Bay-esque presentation no less.  Might not have been quality cinematography, but for those seeking a rollercoaster ride of a movie (which appeared to be its intention), it satisfied that requirement rather well.

I think I actually have faith in Disney for this.  Thrawn or no Thrawn, I doubt they'd want to step all over a franchise that is very clearly in shambles, especially given the fact that their creative lineup includes the talents of Lasseter and Whedon.  We'll just have to wait and see.

[Flipside]

It's interesting because I was watching an interview with Ewan McGregor in which he stated that he wasn't worried about developing a legacy like his uncle did (who played Wedge, for those who didn't know) because the original films were largely character pieces, whereas the newer films are far more about the Environments and Special Effects. He intended it purely as an observation, but it is quite telling.

The problem is that no-one ever told Lucas to take his hand out of the candy jar and you ended up with the Cinematic version of feature-creep.

[Luis Dias]

Why are you guys arguing about movies and the expanded universe?  This is about neither.

#1. There's no way that a single (hell, several) movie will ever produce enough profit to justify that price tag.

Do you realise that Batman "Dark Knight" alone grossed 1 billion dollars?

The Avengers grossed 1.5 billion dollars.

Do you realise they intend to milk this universe to infinity?

#2. Disney will likely not go with any existing story in the expanded universe (for a large number of reasons).

They'll do everything they can.

[Luis Dias]

The Avengers was the ultimate comic book movie, Michael Bay-esque presentation no less.  Might not have been quality cinematography, but for those seeking a rollercoaster ride of a movie (which appeared to be its intention), it satisfied that requirement rather well.

Avengers was a popcorn movie, but to say it was "Michael Bay-esque" is ridiculous. Please stop that.

I think I actually have faith in Disney for this.  Thrawn or no Thrawn, I doubt they'd want to step all over a franchise that is very clearly in shambles, especially given the fact that their creative lineup includes the talents of Lasseter and Whedon.  We'll just have to wait and see.

Right on.

[Mefustae]

Whether this turns out good or bad, I can guarantee you this: 95% of you will be there, in the cinema, hearing those iconic trumpet blasts.

The way I see it, we have good reason to hope. Lucas was the single greatest problem with Star Wars, and with him out of the way and competent staff taking his place, we could really see something magical. The production will probably be more like Disney's support of Marvel for Avengers, rather than something in-house. The main danger here is that they try to make it all about the kids and the toys the kids will want. But hell, we lived that with Phantom Menace, so hopefully if we get burned again it won't sting quite as much. Again, the main thing to be happy about here is that Lucas is going to be as far from the ****ing writers room as possible. I swear to christ, the dialogue from EpII makes me want to slit my goddamned wrists just thinking about it. I don't like sand, indeed!

As for bringing back the old guard, that could be a possibility. From what I remember, Ford has said he'd only ever come back to either Indy or Solo if they were prepared to kill the character off. That said, I'm sure if they threw $15 million at him, he'd probably shuffle in and mumble his lines well enough. Carrie Fisher would be a possibility, especially if she had a daily supply of coke in her rider. Mark Hamill, I bet he'd jump at the chance. Holy ****, I can't tell you how excited I'd be to see him come back as an Obi-Wan type mentor figure, and I honestly think he'd be super-psyched to do that himself. Honestly, out of the three primaries, Hamill would probably be the only thing close to a sure thing. Also, having Billy Dee Williams rock that cape again would be boss. He doesn't even need to do anything, just a quick cut of Lando being totally pimp as usual. That'd make the movie for me right there.

Granted, this could all turn out to be another John Carter, but the kid in me who never got to see the Holy Trilogy in cinemas... well, I want to hope. They've got my money already.

[Luis Dias]

There will be no "iconic trumpet blasts", if by those you mean the 20th century fox ones. That will be awkward indeed.

[newman]

I'm very much looking forward to the Plinkett review of episode 7. As for episode 7 in itself, not so much. Even if the SW prequels had actually been good, which they haven't, enough is enough. I'd rather see creativity and effort focused into giving birth to a new franchise, as opposed to going the "safe" and boring route, seeking security behind an established (but washed out) franchise.

[esarai]

The main star wars theme is mostly a trumpet piece--that's why as a kid I couldn't differentiate the Fox logo soundtrack and the actual movie soundtrack.

and in response to the main topic: Hmmm... we will see.  Too many variables to make an accurate prediction of the outcome, but potentials for mind-blowing awesomeness or soul-shattering failure exist in equal quantities.

[Veers]

Why are you guys arguing about movies and the expanded universe?  This is about neither.

#1. There's no way that a single (hell, several) movie will ever produce enough profit to justify that price tag.

Time will tell, but merch had a lot of potential, especially with a new movie. Even if it isnt true to the Originals (or hell, even the Prequels), its a new generation that will flock to it and want to buy stuff from it. But overall, Disney has gotten more out of this than just Star Wars. They'll get the money back easily, just give them a few years.. tops.

But time will tell.., maybe sooner or later. But we'll just have to wait and see if anything gets better.

[Sandwich]

I wonder how well a Battlestar Galactica-esque reboot of Star Wars would be received.