Sign In

Is it the Characters or the Actors??

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Ahhh...the controversy.

There's been quite a bit of discussion centering on the direction episodes 7,8,9 will go.  It seems obvious from the rumors and news of the returning cast the new trilogy will feature (or at least include) the original actors reprising their original roles. 

I'm not sure how I feel about this.

What I love about the Star Wars Universe as it pertains to the original trilogy are the 6 central characters....Luke, Leia, Han, Chewie, C3PO, and R2D2.

If I had my way, the trilogy would center around them as still fairly young and active; not old and immobile.  Star Wars is about the pacing as much as the characters.  It's also about friendship.  To see new characters or see a more staid plot line would make this a complete failure in my book.  Let's face it re-casting is the way to go.  The characters are what count; not the actors.  Frankly the acting wasnt mind blowing or unachievable. 

And a new set of characters would be what exactly? A sharp witted girl? A hopeful dreamer?  A sarcastic and pragmatic bad ass? Two droids?  Some kind of creature sidekick? Or some variation or combination of the above?

So how exactly would a cast playing new characters with similar personalities/roles be any better than just re-casting the original characters?  Do you not see the irony in a Skywalker/Solo legacy film ending up as nothing more than a de facto re-casting?

 

Then again, maybe it wont resemble the original trilogy at all and the characters will not have the same light hearted appeal.  Maybe they will go dark and serious.  In which case we're likely looking at something resembling the prequels (with better execution one would hope). 

Author
Time

luckydube56 said:

Ahhh...the controversy.

Really?

Author
Time

I'm more concerned that Disney will try to balance the old cast with a bunch of obnoxious teens, not looking forward to meeting the children of Solo & Skywalker, really hope they completely disregard the EU

Author
Time

As it's been thirty years since ROTJ, any offspring are more likely to be in their mid to late twenties.

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

Harrison Ford is 70, Mark Hamill 62 and Carrie Fisher 56.

Bit old for teenage kids!

Author
Time

TV's Frink said:

luckydube56 said:

Ahhh...the controversy.

Really?

 

No. Sarcasm.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

buddy-x-wing said:

I'm more concerned that Disney will try to balance the old cast with a bunch of obnoxious teens, not looking forward to meeting the children of Solo & Skywalker, really hope they completely disregard the EU

 

 

Couldn't agree more.  The Solo/Skywalker offspring story line seems so contrived while simultaneously too predictable. 

I mean, will they all be friends?  Must the children of best friends also be best friends?  I'd rather have completely unrelated characters coming together to become friends.  And any way you cut it, they're going to end up being a re-hash of the original cast of characters.  I have no doubt there will be 3 central human characters, an alien, and two droids.

 

I dont even want to think of the prospects of them being teenage characters.

Author
Time

If the child of Han and Leia was in his/her mid twenties, the story could pick up pretty much where RotJ left off, assuming that the child was already a good pilot and a fully trained Jedi. That way we wouldn't have to retread the "seduction of the Dark Side" story, and have it focus on something bigger than that. For example, if he/she had gained so much power that he/she had godlike abilities, the story could be about the struggle to use them responsibly and for the good of the galaxy instead of using them to save friends. Or it could do what the prequels tried to do, such as make a political thriller with the goal being an ethical galactic government. Or it could introduce an enemy that simply cannot be defeated through the exploitation of an easily accessible structural weakness.

As for the cast of characters, there are literally dozens of well known archetypes that haven't been used in Star Wars. Heck, we haven't even had a scientist as a major character in Star Wars, and Star Wars is SCIENCE fantasy. We could have a noble character who has a tortured and hidden past, a teacher who knows the history of the Old Republic and who teaches our hero about how to structure a lasting democracy, a mechanical being who nevertheless uses the Force, an archaeologist who discovers the buried secrets of the first Jedi, or even a Celestial, a being who isn't particularly interested in the wars of the galaxy yet has terrible power. New characters shouldn't be a problem. I'd say the worst option would be to simply recycle what has already been done simply because people liked it thirty years ago.

DuracellEnergizer: “^He’s embraced the absurd. Don’t expect to gain any conventional understanding from his posts.”
A New Hope Technicolor Recreation (Released!)
The Force Awakens Restructured (V2 Released!) and The Starlight Project

Author
Time

luckydube56 said:

buddy-x-wing said:

I'm more concerned that Disney will try to balance the old cast with a bunch of obnoxious teens, not looking forward to meeting the children of Solo & Skywalker, really hope they completely disregard the EU

Couldn't agree more.  The Solo/Skywalker offspring story line seems so contrived while simultaneously too predictable. 

I mean, will they all be friends?  Must the children of best friends also be best friends?  I'd rather have completely unrelated characters coming together to become friends.  And any way you cut it, they're going to end up being a re-hash of the original cast of characters.  I have no doubt there will be 3 central human characters, an alien, and two droids.

They would be siblings and cousins and I spent a lot of time with my sister and cousins and still do.

One assumes they would be fully fledged adults by now unless this is about Luke and Leia's grandchildren.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6Dp2OfIT_M

Author
Time

In 1977 it was the story of a kid with hopes of adventure dashing off to save a princess with a sarcastic pilot and a furry alien. That can never be repeated. The sincerity, the naivety, the lack of pretension can never be repeated. 

Author
Time

Easytiger said:

In 1977 it was the story of a kid with hopes of adventure dashing off to save a princess with a sarcastic pilot and a furry alien. That can never be repeated. The sincerity, the naivety, the lack of pretension can never be repeated. 

It does not have to be.  Its now a billion dollar franchise to make money by selling to lowest common denominator like star trek 2009.

They will do this by selling happy meals, video games and action figures just like the star wars prequels.

“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.

Author
Time

skyjedi2005 said:

They will do this by selling happy meals, video games and action figures just like the star wars prequels.

I guess you don't remember the original movies, do you?

http://waycooljr.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/starwarslunchbox.jpg

Author
Time
 (Edited)

*** written before Frink posted ***

Every Star Wars film has been a merchandising fest, even Star Wars (1977).

There was so much demand for Star Wars future trash that nobody could keep up with the bootlegs.

Loads of kids at my school had Star Wars knock-off tee shirts or Darth Vadar Lives! badges.

Selling tacky associated stuff doesn't make the progenitor product automatically worthless.

Look at Prometheus, that was a rubbish film with superior associated merchandising.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6Dp2OfIT_M

Author
Time
 (Edited)

And I'm pretty sure there was MORE Star Trek merchandise based off the original show than the 2009 one.

Author
Time

When it comes to actors, one of the things the OT has going for it is some of the greatest voices in Hollywood.

James Earl Jones, Mark Hammil, Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher's deep tones, Billy Dee Williams smooth as silk delivery.

Just because he has the best voice on TV today, I would love to see Ian Glenn in the new Star Wars.

Author
Time

Bingowings said:

Look at Prometheus, that was a rubbish film with superior associated merchandising.

I thought you said you liked Prometheus Bingo

J

Author
Time

Jaitea said:

Bingowings said:

Look at Prometheus, that was a rubbish film with superior associated merchandising.

I thought you said you liked Prometheus Bingo

J

I play Prometheus Bingo all the time. Everyone has a blast down at the Indian Casino.

 

Author
Time

skyjedi2005 said:

Easytiger said:

In 1977 it was the story of a kid with hopes of adventure dashing off to save a princess with a sarcastic pilot and a furry alien. That can never be repeated. The sincerity, the naivety, the lack of pretension can never be repeated. 

It does not have to be.  Its now a billion dollar franchise to make money by selling to lowest common denominator like star trek 2009.

They will do this by selling happy meals, video games and action figures just like the star wars prequels.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvRyBRVpJGw

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

Bingowings said:

It's possible there was more Star Trek OS merchandise before the 1979 film than merchandise for the 2009 one.

There was. Take it from someone who was there. ;)

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

Both. You can't differentiate between the two. Plus a decent script and and a director who knows how to tell a story. (Irwin Kershner springs to mind)