Disney buys Star Wars: Episodes 7 - 9 start in 2015

Wario · 31 Oct 2012, 04:24

Un Fudging Believable .....

http://thewaltdisneycompany.com/disn...-lucasfilm-ltd

**Monstro** · 31 Oct 2012, 04:36

Use the force Tinkerbell lol

melon · 31 Oct 2012, 04:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wario

Un Fudging Believable .....

http://thewaltdisneycompany.com/disn...-lucasfilm-ltd

Looking forward to seeing Darth Donald, his offsiders huey Dewey and louie, princess Minnie, master mickey and padawan goofy

Sent from my HTC Incredible S using Forum Runner

anotherday · 31 Oct 2012, 06:23

Im excited for new movies. My grandchildren (assuming i evr GET any) will love them!

Adje · 31 Oct 2012, 09:16

Well maybe Disney is willing to restore the original moviest then.

I can't wait to get my first Disney released Star Wars Episode 4 movie! Instead of the 20th CF theme song it now starts with the opening tune of Disney with Tinkerbell and Cinderella Castle in the background... Wooooohoooooooooooo

LucyK! · 31 Oct 2012, 10:35

If Star Wars had a little more sparkle and a few more songs I may be more willing to watch it..!

AndrewG · 31 Oct 2012, 10:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by LucyK!

If Star Wars had a little more sparkle and a few more songs I may be more willing to watch it..!

Songs?

The power of John Williams, you do not know. Unknowing leads to anger, anger leads to fear, fear leads to hate, hate leads the dark side of the force.

Joining the Mickey Mouse, Lucas has.

robgomm · 31 Oct 2012, 11:22

Star Wars was essentially the story of Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader and his eventual redemption. Those are George Lucas's words btw and I agree with them.

For Disney to now be planning a new film, and then a new release every few years worries me an awful lot. Episode 7 presumably is set after the fall of the empire, with Luke heading the new Jedi order with the new Republic. I just can't see how this could be interesting. I personally think Disney have to do one of two things. They can either tell stories based between the original movies and the prequels, with Hayden Chistiansen reprising his role as Darth Vader, or they can set it about 100 years in the future with an all new cast. Either way, I can see Disney making a right hash of this.

Cherry.Loaf · 31 Oct 2012, 11:55

People said the same when they bought Marvel and look how spectacular the Avengers was

GDW · 31 Oct 2012, 13:16

Wow!!! Is Meat Loaf going to be in it???

AndrewG · 31 Oct 2012, 14:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by GDW

Wow!!! Is Meat Loaf going to be in it???

Darth Loaf who endorses Mitt Sidious to take over the Republican Republic.

AndrewG · 31 Oct 2012, 14:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cherry.Loaf

People said the same when they bought Marvel and look how spectacular the Avengers was

Yeah but John Carter sucked ass.

Cherry.Loaf · 31 Oct 2012, 14:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndrewG

Yeah but John Carter sucked ass.

So did the Phantom Menace but revenge of the Sith was watchable

Adje · 31 Oct 2012, 14:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by robgomm

For Disney to now be planning a new film, and then a new release every few years worries me an awful lot.

They can't do worse than what Lucas did with Phantom Menace. That prequel trilogy as a whole only had 60 minutes of interesting material. I am sure Disney will do better even with Micky Mouse in the lead

**allrevvedup** · 31 Oct 2012, 15:37

I'm worried it'll become a "Glee Style" Star Wars where Yoda does a song and dance about using the force to the tune of a Lady Gaga song.

Dick · 31 Oct 2012, 16:48

My concern is... what does this mean for indiana jones?

Are they hyping star wars so people will forget about IJ and then Disney can remake them or re-boot it?
I hope they dont. It concerns me. All this rebooting and remaking and reimagining. load of nonsense.

Skyfall is the best Bond yet? yea, jump in. Its more Bourne than Bond.

There must be a Meat fan who works in Disney who is a member here who could give us the low down...anyone?

Sebastian. · 31 Oct 2012, 17:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dick

My concern is... what does this mean for indiana jones?

Are they hyping star wars so people will forget about IJ and then Disney can remake them or re-boot it?

Paramount still own the rights for Indiana Jones.

''Disney CEO Bob Iger stated that Indiana Jones was not factored into the equation during the deal, because Paramount Pictures still has a contract in place for future films.'' - from wikipedia.

robgomm · 31 Oct 2012, 18:05

I personally think they should set it 100 years or so in the future and have an all new cast of characters, maybe they could still relate back to older characters, like in the books I think Han and Leia have kids etc. That could be the way forward.

Adje · 31 Oct 2012, 18:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dick

My concern is... what does this mean for indiana jones?

The Indy franchise was not included in the deal.

As for rebooting, that isn't safe in Lucas' hands either. The guy keeps up with excuses to change the Star Wars movies, like every month or so. I believe I read once that Spielberg is the reason the Indy movies haven't been 'rebooted' yet. Spielberg is very happy with them as they are.

Sebastian. · 31 Oct 2012, 18:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adje

The Indy franchise was not included in the deal.

As for rebooting, that isn't safe in Lucas' hands either. The guy keeps up with excuses to change the Star Wars movies, like every month or so. I believe I read once that Spielberg is the reason the Indy movies haven't been 'rebooted' yet. Spielberg is very happy with them as they are.

Indeed! Otherwise the guy with the sword in Raiders would have shot first.

Dick · 31 Oct 2012, 19:21

Well thank goodness. Forgot that was still paramount. At least it seems kind of safe. I probably should read the articles more rather than just headlines.

*AndyK* · 31 Oct 2012, 21:08

They can't do any worse than Lucas did with Ep 1.

Based on what they've done with Avengers and Pixar I think this could be a good thing, if they get the basic story right.

If I remember correctly, way way back when Star Wars first came out George Lucas stated that the story was a 9 parter, initially it was trilogies called "Star Wars: The Journal Of The Whills", but he changed that to a trilogy of trilogies when he realised the story was too long and complex to tell in 3 parts, he only changed that story when Episodes 1 to 3 were released.

AndrewG · 31 Oct 2012, 21:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndyK

They can't do any worse than Lucas did with Ep 1.

Based on what they've done with Avengers and Pixar I think this could be a good thing, if they get the basic story right.

If I remember correctly, way way back when Star Wars first came out George Lucas stated that the story was a 9 parter, initially it was trilogies called "Star Wars: The Journal Of The Whills", but he changed that to a trilogy of trilogies when he realised the story was too long and complex to tell in 3 parts, he only changed that story when Episodes 1 to 3 were released.

Always thought ep 1-3 were bodged together rather than them being some grand master plan back story. Anakin invents c3po. Bleh. Anakin has no father. Bleh. (I guess this prevents another pre-prequel. I actually think prequels on the whole are a terrible idea, certainly when the "old" universe looks far more advanced and shiny.

There are further problems I think that have manifested over the years which clearly show Lucas has attempted to string the movies together through simple tricks. Why would you see young Anakin's ghost but old Ben at the end of Jedi for example?

Disney could do a good job if you get an enthusiastic and motivated story teller / writer / director on board. Far less visual effects far more story and realism and it would be perfect. The approach needs to be similar to Dark Knight for me to absolutely love it again.

Sebastian. · 31 Oct 2012, 21:39

Someone's happy:

Adje · 31 Oct 2012, 21:40

Lucas never finished his 9-part tale. He had more material than the original trilogy (although much of Empire and Jedi were newly written at the time) but everything before and after the 3 original movies were just notes on paper. Nothing worked out propperly.

I don't see any harm in new material. As long as it fits the storyline somehow.

I'm still amazed how Lucas managed to mess the storyline up with his episode 1 to 3 movies.

As Andy said, if they make serious work of it as they did with Pixar and the Avengers, this could be the best thing for any Star Wars fan.

31 Oct 2012, 04:24	#1
Wario Monstro helps me spell things... Join Date: 05.01.2007 Location: Masculine, Pennsylvania Posts: 9,105	Disney buys Star Wars: Episodes 7 - 9 start in 2015 Un Fudging Believable ..... http://thewaltdisneycompany.com/disn...-lucasfilm-ltd

31 Oct 2012, 04:36	#2
Monstro Promoted to Wario's spellchecker Join Date: 17.09.2005 Location: London Posts: 12,947	Use the force Tinkerbell lol

31 Oct 2012, 06:23	#4
anotherday Super Loafer Join Date: 12.10.2012 Posts: 803	Im excited for new movies. My grandchildren (assuming i evr GET any) will love them!

31 Oct 2012, 09:16	#5
Adje trying to be realistic Join Date: 28.09.2007 Location: Posts: 1,966	Well maybe Disney is willing to restore the original moviest then. I can't wait to get my first Disney released Star Wars Episode 4 movie! Instead of the 20th CF theme song it now starts with the opening tune of Disney with Tinkerbell and Cinderella Castle in the background... Wooooohoooooooooooo

31 Oct 2012, 10:35	#6
LucyK! The Monster Is Luce Join Date: 14.04.2002 Location: Posts: 7,547	If Star Wars had a little more sparkle and a few more songs I may be more willing to watch it..!

31 Oct 2012, 11:22	#8
robgomm Mega Loafer Join Date: 22.10.2006 Location: Hemel Hempstead, UK Posts: 1,673	Star Wars was essentially the story of Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader and his eventual redemption. Those are George Lucas's words btw and I agree with them. For Disney to now be planning a new film, and then a new release every few years worries me an awful lot. Episode 7 presumably is set after the fall of the empire, with Luke heading the new Jedi order with the new Republic. I just can't see how this could be interesting. I personally think Disney have to do one of two things. They can either tell stories based between the original movies and the prequels, with Hayden Chistiansen reprising his role as Darth Vader, or they can set it about 100 years in the future with an all new cast. Either way, I can see Disney making a right hash of this.

31 Oct 2012, 11:55	#9
Cherry.Loaf Los Angeloser Join Date: 02.04.2010 Location: Bristol Posts: 1,073	People said the same when they bought Marvel and look how spectacular the Avengers was

31 Oct 2012, 13:16	#10
GDW Super Loafer Join Date: 26.03.2010 Location: Perth Posts: 984	Wow!!! Is Meat Loaf going to be in it???

31 Oct 2012, 15:37	#15
allrevvedup "Most things that i worry about, never happen anyway" Join Date: 29.11.2003 Location: Liverpool Posts: 5,362	I'm worried it'll become a "Glee Style" Star Wars where Yoda does a song and dance about using the force to the tune of a Lady Gaga song.

31 Oct 2012, 16:48	#16
Dick Super Loafer Join Date: 14.04.2002 Location: Donaghadee, Northern Ireland Posts: 385	My concern is... what does this mean for indiana jones? Are they hyping star wars so people will forget about IJ and then Disney can remake them or re-boot it? I hope they dont. It concerns me. All this rebooting and remaking and reimagining. load of nonsense. Skyfall is the best Bond yet? yea, jump in. Its more Bourne than Bond. There must be a Meat fan who works in Disney who is a member here who could give us the low down...anyone?

31 Oct 2012, 18:05	#18
robgomm Mega Loafer Join Date: 22.10.2006 Location: Hemel Hempstead, UK Posts: 1,673	I personally think they should set it 100 years or so in the future and have an all new cast of characters, maybe they could still relate back to older characters, like in the books I think Han and Leia have kids etc. That could be the way forward.

31 Oct 2012, 19:21	#21
Dick Super Loafer Join Date: 14.04.2002 Location: Donaghadee, Northern Ireland Posts: 385	Well thank goodness. Forgot that was still paramount. At least it seems kind of safe. I probably should read the articles more rather than just headlines.

31 Oct 2012, 21:08	#22
AndyK Relentless Join Date: 21.11.2003 Location: Over the top..... seeing what's on the other side Posts: 18,694	They can't do any worse than Lucas did with Ep 1. Based on what they've done with Avengers and Pixar I think this could be a good thing, if they get the basic story right. If I remember correctly, way way back when Star Wars first came out George Lucas stated that the story was a 9 parter, initially it was trilogies called "Star Wars: The Journal Of The Whills", but he changed that to a trilogy of trilogies when he realised the story was too long and complex to tell in 3 parts, he only changed that story when Episodes 1 to 3 were released.

31 Oct 2012, 21:39	#24
Sebastian. Biggles Join Date: 15.02.2011 Location: Stratosphere Posts: 2,030	Someone's happy:

31 Oct 2012, 21:40	#25
Adje trying to be realistic Join Date: 28.09.2007 Location: Posts: 1,966	Lucas never finished his 9-part tale. He had more material than the original trilogy (although much of Empire and Jedi were newly written at the time) but everything before and after the 3 original movies were just notes on paper. Nothing worked out propperly. I don't see any harm in new material. As long as it fits the storyline somehow. I'm still amazed how Lucas managed to mess the storyline up with his episode 1 to 3 movies. As Andy said, if they make serious work of it as they did with Pixar and the Avengers, this could be the best thing for any Star Wars fan.