Ryan McAvoy said:
Here is the video that the Doug Chiang quote is from...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gx7YSByPI8I
...the quote is hardly damning. He just imagined the X-Wings looking different in his personnal opinion. Also, he says that he was initially designing the ships for TPM to look like OT/McQuarrie ships but George told him not too.
I think the new Trilogy will be just fine in his hands.
His words certainly aren't as harsh as I remember them being.
I'll withhold any judgement until we start seeing some designs, but I actually do have faith in the guy...
I really hope he doesn't work very much. I think it's key to this movie to withold as many intact elements from the OT as possible. Mostly imperial ships, they shouldn't be tinkered with. After seeing new designs in every movie since 99, a little rest and continuity would be welcome.
I'm sure a solution can be found inside the story to explain that, like military technology didn't need to be further developed in peaceful times and therefore the fleet was conserved.
I'm betting that we see star destroyers with Alliance or New Republic markings on them.
Where were you in '77?
Fang Zei said:
So far we've got:
-Michael Kaplan as costume designer. He's not only worked with Abrams on Star Trek '09 and the sequel, he also did the costumes for Blade Runner!
-Chiang and McCaig coming back as concept designers.
-Williams doing the music, which should've always been a foregone conclusion.
We're still awaiting confirmation of who the production designer and the cinematographer will be.
There's also:
-Lawrence Kasdan as a writer. He was reported as just consulting on VII but Kathleen Kennedy has referred to him as one of the writers.
-Michael Arndt as a writer. Pretty sure he's the lead writer.
-Simon Kinberg as a writer/producer?
SilverWook said:
I'm betting that we see star destroyers with Alliance or New Republic markings on them.
SilverWook said:
I'm betting that we see star destroyers with Alliance or New Republic markings on them.
That would be logical and would make complete sense (like death star II). I rather see them stick to the lore and make things logical than trying to do some new stuff just for the sake of making the whole thing more "original".
真実
I don't wanna see new republic Star Destroyers. They're too associated with evil to suddenly be good. Imagine a shot of Luke standing on the bridge of one, he'd look like a Sith lord simply by association.
I wanna see more of the Mon Calamari and Medical Frigate style cruisers we got a glimpse at in ROTJ.
These things look pretty cool... (I would lose the red though IMO)
VIZ TOP TIPS! - PARENTS. Impress your children by showing them a floppy disk and telling them it’s a 3D model of a save icon.
Ryan McAvoy said:
These things look pretty cool... (I would lose the red though IMO)
I agree. I play SWTOR myself and it has some very nice designs. The imperial cruisers look cool too.
真実
Ryan McAvoy said:
I don't wanna see new republic Star Destroyers. They're too associated with evil to suddenly be good. Imagine a shot of Luke standing on the bridge of one, he'd look like a Sith lord simply by association.
That's a captured Japanese Zero with American markings.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Akutan_Zero_in_San_Diego.jpg
In any case, the Rebel Fleet probably took a severe pounding after Endor. Would they pass up useable ships that could be repaired and take on the Imperial remnants on an equal footing? If patching up a derelict star destroyer is good enough for a space pirate with a vision...
Where were you in '77?
That comic reminds me that I would love to finally see a live action foot battle in space. Make it happen J.J.!
Difference is thats just one of a thousand similar plane designs. Theres nothing inherantly evil about the shape of an airplane. But a Stardestroyer is a unique shape only associated with... destroying stars.
VIZ TOP TIPS! - PARENTS. Impress your children by showing them a floppy disk and telling them it’s a 3D model of a save icon.
Some WWII vets might disagree with you on that.
I thought Star destroyer was just a cool name?
As for unique shape...
Where were you in '77?
Ryan McAvoy said:
But a Stardestroyer is a unique shape only associated with... destroying stars.
Ryan McAvoy said:
I don't wanna see new republic Star Destroyers. They're too associated with evil to suddenly be good. Imagine a shot of Luke standing on the bridge of one, he'd look like a Sith lord simply by association.
I wanna see more of the Mon Calamari and Medical Frigate style cruisers we got a glimpse at in ROTJ.
These things look pretty cool... (I would lose the red though IMO)
I think The Clone Wars and the prequels are pervasive enough among the younger audiences to let them get by with Star Destroyers for good guys. In my eyes, probably affected by SE color timing, a Star Destroyer isn't really really evil looking until it's that lighter grey, almost white color. Much more dangerous feeling. I think the darker greys and stripes do a lot to make it feel less evil.
Keep in mind, if they indeed do have the original cast return, that's likely a 35+ year gap since Jedi, so I could totally see only a few remnants of commandeered ISDs and such. It's not really that big a jump to have new capital ships by the time of Episode VII.
DuracellEnergizer said:
Ryan McAvoy said:
But a Stardestroyer is a unique shape only associated with... destroying stars.
Star Destroyers don't literally destroy stars, you know. And anyways, they can always be renamed.
I was thinking of something more along the lines of "Star Defenders".
Makes you wonder, why the Death Star wasn't called Star Destroyer, and the Star Destroyer wasn't called Death Triangle.
SilverWook said:
Some WWII vets might disagree with you on that.
With all due respect, some WWII veterans can also describe the shapes of B-24 "Liberators" and P-51s as "evil", especially some who've seen relatives bombed and fellow pilots being shot mid-air under a safety parachute...
There's nothing inherently "evil" about the A6M Zero. All that can be said is that for any aviation buff it's inherently Japanese with its recognizable Sakae engine and light construction.
The same can be said for a Star Wars fan and a Star Destroyer. It just look inherently Imperial.
And please, do not make such comparisons with real world events and things. "Evil" in the real world is a more complex issue than a movie.
Laserschwert said:
Makes you wonder, why the Death Star wasn't called Star Destroyer, and the Star Destroyer wasn't called Death Triangle.
Because they obviously were based on the real Destroyers used in WWI and II, but instead of the sea they are used among the stars, hence Stardestroyer.
We want you to be aware that we have no plans—now or in the future—to restore the earlier versions.
Sincerely, Lynne Hale publicity@lucasfilm.com
msycamore!!! Where the heck have you been? I was getting worried about you!
Where were you in '77?
msycamore said:
Laserschwert said:
Makes you wonder, why the Death Star wasn't called Star Destroyer, and the Star Destroyer wasn't called Death Triangle.
Because they obviously were based on the real Destroyers used in WWI and II, but instead of the sea they are used among the stars, hence Stardestroyer.
You just blew my mind. I never realised that is why they were called Star Destroyers like 'Imperial Destroyer'. Obvious when you realise it. I just grew up thinking the Empire had picked a threatening sounding name.
and when I said they destroyed stars I was joking. should've emoticonned that one I guess.
VIZ TOP TIPS! - PARENTS. Impress your children by showing them a floppy disk and telling them it’s a 3D model of a save icon.
Ryan McAvoy said:
msycamore said:
Laserschwert said:
Makes you wonder, why the Death Star wasn't called Star Destroyer, and the Star Destroyer wasn't called Death Triangle.
Because they obviously were based on the real Destroyers used in WWI and II, but instead of the sea they are used among the stars, hence Stardestroyer.
You just blew my mind. I never realised that is why they were called Star Destroyers like 'Imperial Destroyer'. Obvious when you realise it. I just grew up thinking the Empire had picked a threatening sounding name.
and when I said they destroyed stars I was joking. should've emoticonned that one I guess.
I tried to point that out in a different thread. Jus' sayin'. ; )
msycamore said:
Laserschwert said:
Makes you wonder, why the Death Star wasn't called Star Destroyer, and the Star Destroyer wasn't called Death Triangle.
Because they obviously were based on the real Destroyers used in WWI and II, but instead of the sea they are used among the stars, hence Stardestroyer.
I can't remember them being called "sea destroyers" though ;)
On the other hand that would be a fitting name for oil rigs.
I hope that the next trilogy open with the same craft like the OT, it would be cool to open Ep 7 with a Star Destroyer.....only to reveal it painted with Republic livery, perhaps policing.
It would be cool to see the bridge refitted, but with colours or stark white and transparent (like JJ's Enterprise)....just to show the Republic have reclaimed the armada from the Empire.
As I said a while ago it would be cool if the new enemy of the Republic were old allies that fought with the Rebels against the Empire....echoing our own history
J
Jaitea said:
I hope that the next trilogy open with the same craft like the OT, it would be cool to open Ep 7 with a Star Destroyer.....only to reveal it painted with Republic livery, perhaps policing.
Yeah, but I could imagine it in a more ironic way. Like open the movie with a Star destroyer coming from behind the camera like SW 77', only to see that it is completly destroyed, cut in half and that it is an old ruin from an old battle. Plenty of wrecks everywhere. And zoom in to a little ship in the middle of them.
Interior ship:
New republic officer: What are we looking for Sir? There's nothing here for decades.
Luke Skywalker: I don't know... I felt something.