Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Disney Announces "One Star Wars Movie Per Year" Plan

timothy posted about a year and a half ago | from the management-always-gets-the-uphill-outhouse dept.

Star Wars Prequels 342

mvar writes "Various sources report that a few days ago at CinemaCon Disney announced their plan to release, following the 2015 JJ Abrams Episode VII, a new Star Wars movie every 1 (one, uno, une) year. Yep, get your stomachs ready, because that's a lot of Jar Jar Binks."

cancel ×

342 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Are they Sequels? (4, Funny)

djlemma (1053860) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509233)

Are they planning to continue the story after the events of "Return of the Jedi?" If that's the case, hopefully we can safely assume that Jar Jar will remain in the past.

Re:Are they Sequels? (3, Insightful)

liquidpele (663430) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509255)

The Jar Jar comment is saying that they'll make it overly kid-friendly, meaning more such characters, not necessarily the exact same character. Maybe they'll visit a Peter Pan planet and a princess will become an X-wing fighter with her talking animal friend as the navigator.

Re:Are they Sequels? (5, Funny)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509287)

...they'll make it overly kid-friendly...

Oh no! Huey, Dewey, and Louie Binks! Mesa gettin' very very scared!

Re:Are they Sequels? (2)

djlemma (1053860) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509291)

Indeed... And now that I've read a couple of TFA's, it sounds like... they might even release an ENTIRE MOVIE devote to Jar Jar, if they felt like it. They're talking about alternating between standalone character-based movies, and episodes of the main plot line. I do, in general, have more faith in Disney than in George Lucas for coming up with a quality film. So, we'll see what happens.....

Re:Are they Sequels? (5, Insightful)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509361)

I do, in general, have more faith in Disney than in George Lucas for coming up with a quality film.

This, ladies and gentleman, is a classic example of 'damning with faint praise'.

Re:Are they Sequels? (1)

bsane (148894) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509597)

And its one of life's (fairly minor) disappointments that its true.

Re:Are they Sequels? (5, Funny)

rmdingler (1955220) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509601)

I find your lack of faith disturbing.

Re:Are they Sequels? (1)

jamstar7 (694492) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509889)

Damn, why is it getting so hard to breathe here? My throat feels pinched...

Re:Are they Sequels? (1)

djlemma (1053860) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509881)

I would love it if I could say "No, you misunderstood what I meant." But no, that's it exactly.

Re:Are they Sequels? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509419)

well theres enough material to make at least 7 more movies. Starting with lukes fight to end the war, characters like mara jade skywalker, the wedding of han and leia, their son jacen becoming a sith, the death of chewbacca trying to save hans son anakin solo... And thats only for the sequels, cause you also have the prequels, old republic and others... George left them material to last a lifetime...

EU doesn't mean anything. (3, Insightful)

Picass0 (147474) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509463)

Now that there are hundreds of millions of dollars is film deals being made the Hollywood powers that be will make whatever movie they want and don't care about a bunch of books that were written years ago.

Re:EU doesn't mean anything. (1)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509919)

I was pondering that, too. I suspect Disney will at least take some inspiration from non-movie canon sources, though, to capitalize on their popularity and to save on creative investment. It's not like they're letting J. J. Abrams reboot (and by which I mean completely trash) the entire storyline.

Re:Are they Sequels? (3, Insightful)

ultranova (717540) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509431)

And now that I've read a couple of TFA's, it sounds like... they might even release an ENTIRE MOVIE devote to Jar Jar, if they felt like it. They're talking about alternating between standalone character-based movies, and episodes of the main plot line.

Well, isn't that a good thing? Anyone(?) who wants to see Jar-Jar can watch the J-J movies, and anyone who doesn't doesn't lose much else.

Re:Are they Sequels? (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509725)

As long as they are unrelated to the main story and you don't need to see them to follow it.

Re:Are they Sequels? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509309)

The Jar Jar comment is saying that they'll make it overly kid-friendly, meaning more such characters, not necessarily the exact same character.

Maybe they'll visit a Peter Pan planet and a princess will become an X-wing fighter with her talking animal friend as the navigator.

You mean like Episode 4-6 was? Only then we were the kids.. Fx. Visiting a teddy bear planet..

Re:Are they Sequels? (1)

_Shad0w_ (127912) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509327)

And remind me who the figures of hate in the original trilogy were? Or indeed are.

Re:Are they Sequels? (2, Insightful)

Custard Horse (1527495) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509493)

In an episode of 'Spaced' Tim says "Jar Jar Binks makes the Ewoks look like fucking Shaft!"

Can you imagine Disney making a film so bad that JJB actually looks play?

New films could potentially ruin those that came before it. Highlander 2 springs to mind..

Re:Are they Sequels? (3, Insightful)

JoeMerchant (803320) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509855)

Highlander 2 didn't happen - it was an alternate, dead-end timeline. Nothing to see there, move along.

If Disney is going to ruin Star Wars, they're going to do it by appealing to the broadest possible market, something Lucas was desperately trying to do himself, and mostly succeeding. Did anybody here actually eat any C3P-Os in the 1980s?

Re:Are they Sequels? (3, Interesting)

SteveFoerster (136027) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509869)

New films could potentially ruin those that came before it. Highlander 2 springs to mind..

Okay, that's a good point. But at the same time, I'll never be ten years old again when I watch a Star Wars movie, so I'll never have the same experience. I accept this and look forward to seeing what they come up with. After all, I can always hate it later once I've actually seen it.

I also take heart in that Carrie Fisher and Mark Hamill may need the money, but Harrison Ford doesn't and he signed on. That's a weak sign, but I'll take it as a good one.

Re:Are they Sequels? (1)

Belial6 (794905) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509911)

Highlander what? They only made one Highlander move and a TV show. ONE I SAY!

Re:Are they Sequels? (2)

rmdingler (1955220) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509571)

Exactly. And today, just as it was when ET busted box office records, wild success with young movie viewers is necessary to achieve generational popularity. Disney is the perfect choice: There's no danger that they'll have budgeting problems, they're keenly aware of what a cash cow this'll be if they do it properly, and by properly, I mean to suggest they'll do their best to capture another generation of merchandise buyers.

Re:Are they Sequels? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509567)

"Star Wars X11: The Flying Leopard." Luke Skywalker (Justin Beiber) and Hans Solo (Ashton Kucher) compete for the attentions of Princess Leia (Taylor Swift). The sniping gets nasty and escalates into fist fights, which Hans wins easily. Humiliated, Luke decides to train in the ancient Jedi martial art of "Domas", which coincidentally looks a lot like Bruce Lee's Jeet Kune Do, only with CGI enhancements. Hans gets a surprise in the big showdown when Luke delivers a flying kick, but the match continues. Suddenly the alarm sounds... it turns out that a squadron of 10,000 Imperial fighter craft have been spotted, and many of them have crew who were also trained in martial arts.

Re:Are they Sequels? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509777)

Son, next time you need to log in. I have a big fat contract waiting for you.

- Disney Suit Who Knows What He's Doing with this Nerdy Star Wars Shit

Re:Are they Sequels? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43510035)

"Star Wars X11: The Flying Leopard." Luke Skywalker (Justin Beiber) and Hans Solo (Ashton Kucher) compete for the attentions of Princess Leia (Taylor Swift). The sniping gets nasty and escalates into fist fights, which Hans wins easily. Humiliated, Luke decides to train in the ancient Jedi martial art of "Domas", which coincidentally looks a lot like Bruce Lee's Jeet Kune Do, only with CGI enhancements. Hans gets a surprise in the big showdown when Luke delivers a flying kick, but the match continues. Suddenly the alarm sounds... it turns out that a squadron of 10,000 Imperial fighter craft have been spotted, and many of them have crew who were also trained in martial arts.

Sooo, Karate Kid IX?

Re: Are they Sequels? (5, Insightful)

AudioEfex (637163) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509581)

You mean like they did with Marvel?

(In case it wasn't obvious, that was delivered with a great big /eyeroll)

The comments from people who automatically assume that just because its Disney it's going t somehow be aimed at toddlers hasn't been paying attention the last twenty years or so. Pretty Woman, Pulp Fiction? Released under branches of Disney.

Stop thinking about Davy Crocket or Mary Poppins - Disney doesn't make live action like that any more. They went after a real director for Episode VII, they have old school Star Wars folk like Larry Kasdan working on the solo films, and again - seen any of the Marvel pictures?

The problem with the prequels wasn't the kiddificaton - that's always been in Star Wars (the droids, the Ewoks, Chewbacca to a certain extent). It was because Lucas cannot write dialogue or direct actors worth a damn and he took too much on for those films. Most casual folk don't realize that he did it direct either of the original sequels. He is brilliant, just it at those things (and even Carrie Fisher's help ghost writing couldn't save the Padme storyline, George has such a fundamental misunderstanding of women it cannot help but show).

I was never more happy than when Disney bought Star Wars - the Disney of today is much different tha the Disney we (or our parents) grew up with, and all this immature "OMGZ ITZ DISNEY!" knee-jerk garbage here and elsewhere just shows a fundamental lack of knowledge of the film industry over the past couple of decades, where Disney has realized that they have the best success when they outsource for talent and bring in the best people to do the job and trust them to do it right.

Personally I cannot wait for Abrams to have his stamp on the franchise, and the future directors who will have an insane amount of resources to make hopefully great Star Wars films. Disney is just signing the checks here and making sure it doesn't turn into porn - other than that, I think you will find this isn't Walt's Disney any more.

Re: Are they Sequels? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509887)

Yes. Right. Insightful. After JizzJuice Assbrams shit and pissed all over star trek, let's have him do it to star wars too. Cuz you know, there's so much sci fi out there that if these 2 big franchises are reduced to steaming piles of ass waste, well, there's plenty more............

Re: Are they Sequels? (1)

IANAAC (692242) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509915)

The comments from people who automatically assume that just because its Disney it's going t somehow be aimed at toddlers hasn't been paying attention the last twenty years or so. Pretty Woman, Pulp Fiction? Released under branches of Disney.

On the other hand, you can count on Disney to milk it for all it's worth, and then some.

I occasionally watch "Once Upon a Time" (Disney owned/produced), which started out well enough. Then they started adding in other Disney characters from different timelines, and it just got... ridiculous.

Shortly after the Disney purchase, an episode featured a rather prominent Start Wars ringtone from one of the characters' cell phones. Yeah. That fit right in.

Re: Are they Sequels? (2)

jamstar7 (694492) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509929)

Of COURSE it's not Walt's Disney anymore. They went to the Dark Side when they hired Michael Eisner. Any takers on where Lucas got the inspiration for Darth Vader?

Re: Are they Sequels? (3, Insightful)

Libertarian001 (453712) | about a year and a half ago | (#43510055)

In principle I'm not against Disney having Star Wars, but they've already made two bad decisions. 1st, they're going away from all of the Expanded Universe. Hand of Thrawn was really the way to go for the next trilogy. Beyond that, you don't have 20 years of additional product be part of the official continuity and then *poof* decide to crap on everyone and declare it persona non grata. That's just plain rude.

Just as bad, they brought in Abrams to direct. Seriously? There's a lot of good directing and writing talent out there, and JJ is not it. He already trashed Trek. I'm glad you enjoyed his version of Trek. Yes, it had much higher production values than the mess that was all of the TNG movies, but his movie was crap. One huge plot hole after another and things that frankly just didn't make any kinds of sense. I haven't seen anything from his latest Trek endeavor that makes me want to see it, and I haven't heard anything from Disney that makes me want to see the new Star Wars.

Three bad decisions. I love them as much as the next geek, but rolling out Ford, Fisher and Hamill?! Really?! Ugh.

Re:Are they Sequels? (3, Informative)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509671)

I always thought that the original trilogy was like that anyway. R2D2 was kinda "cute" and there mostly for comic relief, paired with an effeminate straight man in the form of C3PO. Then there were the Ewocks. The whole first movie was a typical Disney-esq coming of age yarn.

Re:Are they Sequels? (1)

Intropy (2009018) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509745)

I have no problem with Leia learning to pilot an X-Wing, and her animal friend already is a navigator.

Re:Are they Sequels? (0)

flayzernax (1060680) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509313)

Their planning to own the exclusive rights to anything star wars related for the next 2000 years, if they can do it cheaply and shoddily they will.

Re:Are they Sequels? (1)

jamstar7 (694492) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509945)

They're planning to own the exclusive rights to anything star wars related for the next 2000 years, if they can do it cheaply and shoddily for ridiculously high licensing fees, they will.

FTFY.

Re:Are they Sequels? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509485)

Posting as AC for rather obvious reasons, but I actually liked Jar Jar. That is until popular geek culture told me that I couldn't...

Re:Are they Sequels? (0)

fuzznutz (789413) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509595)

And did you have fun riding the short bus to school every day?

Re:Are they Sequels? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509713)

And did you have fun taking your dad's short dick every day?

Re:Are they Sequels? (1)

interval1066 (668936) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509491)

The Jar Jar comment means Disney is going to squeeze the shit out of the franchise until only pennies fall to the ground. Then they'll crumble it up and throw it away for the next cultural trash the masses will pony up for.

Re:Are they Sequels? (2)

SternisheFan (2529412) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509647)

Anything done by Disney is meant for kids to enjoy. They'll do 'their' disney-fied version, and adult Star Wars fans will scream bloody murder that they're screwing up Star Wars. I say let the new generation of 5-12 year olds enjoy their Star Wars, without 40 year olds in costumes ruining it for them by demonstrating in costumes outside of theaters.

P.S. Jar Jar was meant to be a goofy, lovable character for the kids to enjoy, and still today grown men want to string him up. Amazing.

Re:Are they Sequels? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509813)

Jar Jar wasn't supposed to be a kid-friendly character, he was supposed to be a kid-friendly cashcow. Every facet is by-committee, annoying junk. He's Poochie.

Re:Are they Sequels? (1)

jamstar7 (694492) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509957)

I didn't want to string up Jar-Jar.


I wanted to barbeque him and feed him to my dog. BIG difference.

Maybe they shoot together and then split it up (4, Interesting)

eksith (2776419) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509247)

A bit like the LOTR series, maybe they're actually planning to continuously shoot one movie that then gets sliced to comfortable (relatively speaking) run times.

Re:Maybe they shoot together and then split it up (2)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509495)

> sliced to comfortable run times.

So they're going to shoot 12 hours all at once and release one chunk over the next 37 years?

Re:Maybe they shoot together and then split it up (2)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509815)

So it will be a 1 hour movie stretched to three hours every year?

Jar Jar Binks "Webisodes" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509253)

I've heard from sources that there are Jar Jar Banks "Webisodes" coming.

H.L. Mencken (4, Insightful)

selectspec (74651) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509257)

“No one in this world, so far as I know — and I have searched the records for years, and employed agents to help me — has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people.”

“Because the plain people are able to speak and understand, and even, in many cases, to read and write, it is assumed that they have ideas in their heads, and an appetite for more. This assumption is a folly.”

Re: H.L. Mencken (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509417)

(Except USA Today)

A mix (2)

crossmr (957846) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509265)

I expect we'll see a mix.
They obviously want to do episode 7/8/9
but..
they have a wealth of source information out there. Tons of books..
What they'll probably do is have a team working on the "Core" movies and other teams filming other movies. Based on other books/characters/etc that will help keep it a little fresher.

Re:A mix (3, Insightful)

Doctor Device (890418) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509393)

I have very strong doubts that disney would bother looking at the expanded universe, much less actually acquiring the rights to make those stories. I wish they would, but I think they won't.

Re:A mix (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509521)

except all those stories' rights(read: anything star wars) are now owned by disney.

Lead Time (5, Insightful)

LordLucless (582312) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509267)

One movie a year isn't that much when you've got a three-year lead-time. It's not necessary to complete each movie individually in a year
2013: Script treatment
2014: Shooting #1, Script treatment #2
2015: Post-production and release #1, Shooting #2, Script treatment #3
2016: Post-production and release #2, Shooting #3, Script treatment #4
And so on. The trick would be hanging on to your actors; you'd probably need to rotate through different producers/directors too.

As Tim of Ctrl-Alt-Del said, they've been pumping out Marvel-universe movies faster than that, and most of them have been pretty darn good. If they mine the better expanded universe fiction, there's no reason to expect they couldn't produce decent movies at a one-per-year rate.

Re:Lead Time (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509337)

...there's no reason to expect they couldn't produce decent movies at a one-per-year rate.

Well, you know... unless you count the fact that they haven't produced a really good Star Wars movie since 1980, or an acceptable one since 1983.

The actual history is not a good indication.

Re:Lead Time (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509387)

They being? Not Disney, or the production team behind Star Wars Episode VII, or did you not notice that?

Re:Lead Time (2)

LordLucless (582312) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509441)

Well, no. Disney hasn't produced any Star Wars movies, ever, at all, period.

Yes, they have (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509471)

Well, no. Disney hasn't produced any Star Wars movies, ever, at all, period.

Lucasfilm HAS been making those films.

Disney BOUGHT Lucasfilms.

Therefore, Disney HAS been making the Star Wars movies.

Oh. My. God! I have turned into a Slashdot pedant!

Re:Yes, they have (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509539)

Well, no. Disney hasn't produced any Star Wars movies, ever, at all, period.

Lucasfilm HAS been making those films.

Disney BOUGHT Lucasfilms.

Therefore, Disney HAS been making the Star Wars movies.

Oh. My. God! I have turned into a Slashdot pedant!

No, no they haven't.. Your weak Jedi mind trick isn't enough to make me not see through that false logic... :P

Re:Yes, they have (1)

Ambiguous Coward (205751) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509779)

Time for a car analogy!

Person owns a car.

Car is used to run over and kill multiple pedestrians.

You buy said car.

YOU WERE RUNNING OVER AND KILLING MULTIPLE PEDESTRIANS!

See how ridiculous that makes you sound? :)

Re:Lead Time (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509677)

If you think the Marvel movies have been good ones ... then you will probably be happy with any garbage Disney shits out...

Like a TV series, a 'movie series' (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509281)

So, its kinda like a TV series, but you have to pay $10 per episode. Genius!

Re:Like a TV series, a 'movie series' (1)

jamstar7 (694492) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509977)

So, its kinda like a TV series, but you have to pay $10 per episode. Genius!

$16. Per seat. Plus the hideously overinflated styrofoam popcorn.

Jar Jar Abrams (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509311)

Meesa cash out.

What's all this obsession with Staw Wars? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509317)

I never got why all the people on /. are so obsessed with Star Wars and Star Trek.
They might be good movies for their time, but nowadays younger kids are so used to the cliched concept of 'wars among the stars',
that it's gotten boring...

Moreover, Star * movies were mostly popular in the western world, most people in the east dont give a damn what happens to these movies.

How about taking a more global approach and creating something that appeals to audiences worldwide...

That way the /. crowd can be more diverse in terms of taste in entertainment...

Re:What's all this obsession with Staw Wars? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509577)

> I never got why all the people on /. are so obsessed with Star Wars and Star Trek.

It is what many /.ers grew up with, it is a big part our collective childhood.

> east dont give a damn what happens to these movies.

Most people in West don't give shit IT in general. But this is an IT site.
Many IT people (not all) like SciFi.
Star Wars and Star Trek are good examples of SciFi.

Not only that but this is an English language site. Its audence is mostly westerns.

Re:What's all this obsession with Staw Wars? (2)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509613)

I saw the Star Trek reboot in Hong Kong.The cinema was packed. And I saw about 50,000 Chinese kids wearing ST t-shirts around town that week.

*blows smoke from fingertip 'gun barrel'*

Why? (1)

denzacar (181829) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509847)

I saw about 50,000 Chinese kids wearing ST t-shirts around town that week.

What were you doing looking at that many Chinese kids?

That's 7142 kids per day, and 297 kids every hour. Almost 5 kids every minute.

Re:What's all this obsession with Staw Wars? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43510089)

> How about taking a more global approach and creating something that appeals to audiences worldwide...

The last time I checked, there's no shortage of videos involving nudity and blonde women with large, silicone-perfect breasts and firm, rounded muscular butts without a gram of visible bodyfat. Disney won't have the nudity, of course, but I'm sure they'll find a way to work a few hundred warrior women wearing nothing but Brazilian latex body paint (led by a powerful black womyn of ambiguous gender) into at least one future episode...

Hopefully... (4, Insightful)

Phrogman (80473) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509321)

The first scene, in the first movie, is a slo-mo shot of Jar-Jar Binks getting his head sliced off with a lightsaber. That might go a ways towards regaining the audience that Lucas has managed to piss off so heavily with eps 1-3. Casually mention a disease that wiped out all the Gungans and Ewoks...

I doubt it though, I imagine Disney will continue the Lucas development cycle:
1) Think of products that can be marketed easily to kids
2) Come up with some script that links those products together in some manner. Regular rules for storytelling, or logic need not apply. Hire any actors who will sign, giving the main roll to the worst actor you get.
3) Sell as much merchandise as possible, use some of the profits to make the next movie, starting over at 1.

I sincerely hope I am wrong mind you and that Disney hires someone who *gets* what was attractive about most of Eps 4-6 and makes films in keeping with those at least, but I doubt it will turn out that way.

Re:Hopefully... (2)

Dr. Spork (142693) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509433)

Yup, I think you pretty much nailed it on all points, but I would add this: Whatever is produced, the kids are guaranteed to love it. It turns out that children are kinda stupid and have terrible taste. I think the "adult" reaction to all this is to just leave the Star Wars franchise to the children, and not to expect it to entertain us adults. This is our attitude to everything else that Disney does, so why an exception out of Star Wars? Let the kids have their cartoons (let's face it, that's how the franchise will continue: cartoons with some live action greenscreen acting pasted in). We'll always have Whedon's Avengers, Game of Thrones and other such fairy tales that are enjoyable by adults. I don't think that Disney will be making any of them.

Re:Hopefully... (2)

daw1234 (585433) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509545)

Whedon's Avengers

........

I don't think that Disney will be making any of them.

Missed something there?

Re:Hopefully... (5, Funny)

femtobyte (710429) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509445)

The first scene, in the first movie, is a slo-mo shot of Jar-Jar Binks getting his head sliced off with a lightsaber.

Unfortunately, the second scene has the camera view swooping through the door marked "sekrit cloning lab" into a room filled with tens of thousands of mechanical pods. Lids on the pods slide open in unison, as the camera zooms in to the blank soulless gaze of a Jar-Jar clone. Scrolling title text rolls from the bottom of the screen, receding to a vanishing point:

STAR
WARS
EPISODE VII
Rise of the Jar-Jarmy

Re:Hopefully... (1)

JackPepper (1603563) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509721)

You had me at Jar-Jarmy.

Re:Hopefully... (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509487)

too fast, too mercifull. toss him into a sarrlac and have footage in the belly of him screaming and getting disfigured during a few minutes of slow digestion

Re:Hopefully... (1)

failedlogic (627314) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509681)

Agreed. There used to be a time when Disney used to stand for quality but that's really no longer the case.

I was kid when Empire was first released. The story was way too dark/scary for me at the time. Now, the movie is absolutely amazing,

There's a lot of really cool stuff they could do in SW movies. It doesn't have to be gory. If you sacrifice toy sales, you can make a hell of a better movie. Kids don't belong in the theater. They don't need to see a movie of beheadings, bar fights, understanding what bounty hunters do, see giant armies and exploding planets.

If any other movie director/company had the license, there are some really cool things you could do with the movies .... SFX, dialog, etc. but it just anin't gonna happen with Star Wars. I hope something cool happens, but I'll just settle blissfully with the idea I at least got to see Empire.

The Marvel movies, despite Disney owning Marvel studios, have actually been fairly good despite fast releases. I never read any SW Sci-Fi novels, but could it be they're just going to adapt some books into movies .... kinda like Flemming's 007 series?

Re:Hopefully... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43510047)

"The first scene, in the first movie, is a slo-mo shot of Jar-Jar Binks getting his head sliced off with a lightsaber."

Isn't that a little too quick? I was hoping for a spacing or getting dropped into the almighty sarlacc.

Re:Hopefully... (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about a year and a half ago | (#43510067)

1) Think of products that can be marketed easily to kids

I am famously cynical and even I think you're being simultaneously overly and inadequately cynical. Inadequately because kids will buy anything stamped "Star Wars", and overly because I don't think Lucas is just trying to make stuff that appeals to kids without any concern for whether it's a good idea or not. Remember, he doesn't need more money, he's got enough money to make lots more of it investing even in sure things.

One per year? (0)

TimO_Florida (2894381) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509333)

They'll be crap. Period. You can't churn stuff out that fast and not use cheap CGI, lots of regurgitated stock scenes and cardboard sets. We're talking Galactica1980 bad. Next they'll say they'll have the focus on gangs of pre-teens and it'll turn into "Bad News Bears in Space"....

Meh, think of them as movie serials (2)

rsilvergun (571051) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509381)

and it's not so bad. I hate to say it but I liked the animated clone wars movie. That said, I can't in a million years imagine JJ "Lens Flare" Abrams making a good Star Wars movie. But you never know. Maybe he'll just end up managing the project and letting better people write/edit/do all the work to it.

Re:One per year? (2)

Dr. Spork (142693) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509451)

I disagree. What we will get is very expensive CGI, lots of regurgitated stock scenes and non-existent sets (because a greenscreen background is not a set).

More?? (2, Interesting)

frootcakeuk (638517) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509347)

Personally I was sick to death of the whole franchise after the 2nd sequel/prequel? (the second new one released after the first 3 originals). Personally after growing up with and loving the original trilogy, the poorly executed CGI completely killed it for me whilst seemingly adding nothing groundbreaking to the main story. It has now become a case of I will actively avoid anything star wars based, and I hate them all for ruining what was quite possibly the best Sci-Fi story ever made! Fuck Lucas, Fuck Disney, Fuck em all!

Re:More?? (5, Informative)

paiute (550198) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509543)

the best Sci-Fi story ever made!

For some extremely loose definition of science fiction. Star Wars had fiction but no science. It is sword and sorcery in space.

Episode 7's already been spoiled (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509359)

Star Wars: Episode VII - The Gauntlet of Infinity [digitalspy.com] . Kind of a risky decision to bring in the Marvel properties at this point, but we shall see what JJ Abrams can do.

Re:Episode 7's already been spoiled (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509899)

Since Star Trek 11, I am convinced that even a non-risky move by Abrams would end up in a disaster.

Well... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509367)

Better Jar Jar Binks than adding Wall-E in as a droid.

Isn't Jar Jar in line with (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509369)

the original movie? Is Chewbacca any different?

Alien - check.
Goofy - check.
Annoying - check. (in fact, C's roar annoyed me more than J)

Re:Isn't Jar Jar in line with (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509499)

Chewbacca doesn't say stupid things in a phony Jamaican accent.

Re:Isn't Jar Jar in line with (1)

mark-t (151149) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509867)

Jar Jar *is* supposed to be an alien, after all, and there's some validity to the notion that they would have some sort of accent. Since it's a human playing the part and not a real alien, it's entirely understandable that the accent is probably going to have things in common with some accent spoken on Earth. In this case, it happened to be Jamaican... and somehow, everybody and their dog is so offended by it that they want the character's head on a pike.

Re:Isn't Jar Jar in line with (1)

transporter_ii (986545) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509871)

> Chewbacca doesn't say stupid things in a phony Jamaican accent.

But he did manage to nail Han Solo's wife. What a wookie.

Who misses Lucas yet? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509371)

So, nerds, still think Lucas is evil incarnate for what he did to your precious little space series? Still think that adding Ewoks or Jar Jar Binks was the absolute worstest thing that ruined everything you ever loved FOREVER? Still think nothing could ever compare to the betrayal you felt when the word "midichlorians" came across the silver screen for the first time?

We're Disney, bitches. We're here to show you shut-in hermits the meaning of "pain that won't go away". By the time we're done playing with you like the toys you are, you'll be crying out Lucas's name to save you. You'll wish there were more midichlorians just to make the hurting stop. And you'll be building idols to the Ewoks in the hopes it'll bring them back after what we've got planned for your financially exploitable universe.

And there's not a damn thing you can do about it.

*sniff* *sniff* Wait, hold on! What's that I smell? *sniff* *sniff* Ooo, it smells like another space drama! You nerds like that, don't you? Yes, yes you do. And you'll follow it straight into our clutches, too! *sniff* *sniff* Mmmmm, that smells sooooo lucrative! Get the lawyer hive on the line! Smells like this one will be cheap, too! After all, I'm certain the owning company doesn't care much about this little show called "Firefly", right? No, no they most certainly don't!

The true power of the dark side (2, Funny)

puddingebola (2036796) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509373)

"No, George Lucas has sold the franchise to soulless corporate executives at Disney..." "Nooooooooooooo, THAT"S NOT TRUE, THAT'S IMPOSSIBLE!" "Search your feelings, you know this to be true."

Re:The true power of the dark side (1)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509525)

He had already fallen to the Dark Side by the prequels, where the money from tickets was irrelevant compared to the billions on merchandising rights per film. That's why Jar Jar was born...as a toy and shoehorned into the movie.

In b4 Vader Musical (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509449)

And princess Leia joins the other princesses in the magic kingdom.

What a coincidence (4, Funny)

paiute (550198) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509527)

"...Disney announced their plan to release, following the 2015 JJ Abrams Episode VII, a new Star Wars movie every 1 (one, uno, une) year. "

That's funny. I have a plan to not watch a new Star Wars movie every year.

but after indiana jones IV (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509649)

it was time for lucas to retire

Re:but after indiana jones III (1)

fibonacci8 (260615) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509759)

Corrected the title for you. You're welcome.

Nice! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509703)

It's nice to see that /. has finally arrived at last week's news.

The world is getting stupider.. (1, Insightful)

kheldan (1460303) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509723)

..and Disney is one of the leaders in the charge.
The original Star Wars trilogy was fine the way it was. All Disney is going to do is ruin it for everyone.

Re:The world is getting stupider.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509987)

as if Lucas hadn't worked to do that pretty well already for every franchise he started? They'll simply continue on until they stop getting people stupid enough to pay them for it.

Original Actors (1)

cstacy (534252) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509771)

They'll be using Hamill, Fisher, and Ford again. No problem with the age of the actors. Because, like the last Star Wars movie produced, it will all be Animated. It's going to be a new cartoon every year. That's one reason they cancelled the Saturday morning follow-on of Clone Wars: don't want to saturate the audience.

What about the Avengers Movie... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43509859)

Didn't Disney have a hand in that?

If they treat Star Wars the same way we could be in for a plesant surprise...

If not, well you will all be vindicated.

So... (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509903)

Now we know what the "J. J." in J. J. Abrams stands for.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>