Maybe they’ll make Dark Disciple into a movie or something like that.
But they’re selling this as THE FINAL SEASON so…
If they’re ever going to make any other arcs, they’re probably gonna have to be something else.
Why do people pre-order in the first place? Stupid.
Convenience, mostly. Sometimes it’s to lock in a sale price that happens between announcement and on-sale date. Scarcity can be a thing, too. Pre-ordering limited editions makes a lot of sense in many cases. Plus in some cases pre-ordering lets you put money down when you have it over time so you’re not shocking your wallet all in one go if it’s an expensive item.
These are some pretty common sense answers in the past 30 or so years that “pre-ordering” (or the 20-30 years before that, “layaway”) has been a popular purchasing option.
Just did the same.
Polygon’s article on this links to a wal-mart listing for a blu-ray only box-set at $130.
That flip-top box is pretty cool, honestly. A little more reminiscent of the original VHS Trilogy packaging from the mid-80s.
LOL at Episode IV getting the smallest bonus disc possible.
Everything about it is kinda suspect for now because it’s just scans (?) from the back of an international release, taken from a website most of us haven’t heard of before. But they’re images, which are harder to gin up than a simple list, so I guess they’re instinctively more believable. Although even on these images, the “list” seems pretty incomplete and as you just pointed out, possibly inaccurate
also, from a graphic design standpoint, that image is janky as hell. I know blu-ray and UHD cases aren’t particularly well designed or have a lot of effort or time put into them anymore, but for real that back cover looks like it was made in MS Paint.
Nobody knows. And it seems like the list of bonus features is incomplete on top of that?
The main assumption that people seem to be going with on home video forums is that “making-of-collection” = “everything that was a bonus feature on the 2011 blu-rays and the 04 DVDs is being ported over”
How are the film scores apples & oranges?
Goldsmith’s score for the Motion Picture is great (and Goldsmith himself is a legend for very good reason) but a whole lot of Star Trek music is just… unremarkable. In some instances it’s actually bad. Especially once you start factoring in the TV shows. I don’t know that I can point to a single bad Star Wars score, though, and many of both series’ scores are trying to do the same thing, using the same musical language in a lot of instances.
I’m not saying there isn’t some timeless Star Trek music. But I can’t see an argument being made for Star Trek having a better musical component.
Not that I’ve ever really gone in for comparing the two (oh, remember the days when that was the most contentious question in all of “Fandom?” how little did we know…) but I always felt that the comparison was ONLY fair when you took the very best of each series and measured those two, AT their best, against each other.
I will say this, the only area in which I think there’s no real argument whatsoever is that Star Wars has better music. That’s the only aspect where I don’t think there’s any contest at all.
The Empire might seem like fascist super state, but meaningful comparisons to real historical figures are not really appropriate.
They’re 100% appropriate. Can people take them too far, and by extension essentially lose themselves in the forest of symbolism and extrapolated meaning without any storytelling context? Absolutely. It happens all the time, when people are looking to project themselves and their own experiences onto the film in numerous ways.
But even “just” Star Wars allowed for (and was intended to allow for) comparison to real historical figures.
This seems like a guess, to me? Why would the commentaries be on the bonus disc, for one. I don’t know. My first instinct is to say this is placeholder info/guessing based on old product.
I think it’s safe to just call it, definitely.
The whole thing is ridiculous and weird and fear-based, honestly. It begins with the silly assumption that the consumer base is so reactionary and easily upset that the presence of black-bars will cause a significant number of viewers to balk and refuse to watch the programming. Which, so far as I know, has never been tested, and is completely untrue. Its only real precedent comes from when the decision was made in the early days of home video to bypass presenting movies in their original theatrical ratio for the sake of filling the screen on a tv, as not only were tvs square-shaped, but were significantly smaller, and were watched in most living rooms at a semi-fair distance. Which is again, not the case today, as even the cheap TVs are typically minimum 42" and the small screens, such as phones and tablets, are being watched much closer up, effectively replicaing the FOV you’d get at a theater.
And that’s not even getting into the fact most viewers are far more sophisticated about aspect ratios and why the black bars are there than they were in the '80s and 90s.
Basically - programmers and decisionmakers at most networks just assume their audiences are easily-upset rubes and babies unable to sit through the tiny acclimation period it takes to stop paying attention to the black bars - and they think the best way to solve the problem of their presumed-to-be-idiot audience is to placate the lowest common denominator at the expense of the movie and its creators. So instead of those “rubes” being reminded that if they’re honestly THAT upset about black bars they can hit the zoom button that comes for free on every remote of every TV sold in the last 10+ years, the solution is to chop up the movie before it’s presented. Because that’s how they’ve always done it, thanks to circumstances that basically don’t exist anymore, paired with circumstances that likely never existed back then, either.
There’s basically zero reason why every movie isn’t simply presented as it was intended to be seen by its director, as the default, and then the consumer can decide how they want to butcher it on their own if they’re that concerned about “not getting all the TV they paid for.”
Incidentally George is back at Lucasfilm.
Pretty sure this isn’t true outside of angry YouTube grifters wanting it to be that way. Where are you hearing this?
I’d put odds on the 16x9 blu-ray/digital cuts.
I hate to keep harping on this point, but I have studied a bit of Hollywood history and nearly every movie goes through rewrites.
But I never said “movies don’t go through rewrites.” I said “comparing the process on The Rise of Skywalker to the process on the original Star Wars is a bad comparison.” And then I tried to support that claim by pointing out just how differently not only the process was, but the end results of those processes were. That claim doesn’t rely on the idea that movies don’t get rewritten, or that things don’t change between drafts. I’m not saying it doesn’t happen. I’m saying HOW it happened with THOSE TWO MOVIES is a bad comparison to make.
If you think anything any Star Wars movie has done script wise is unusual, you haven’t studied enough of the process.
This is also not true, sorry.
some of you all really missed out on your emo high school romances and it shows
pretty much every romance is emo!
The ones that aren’t are just like… that’s just a roommate, isn’t it?
And on top of that, considering how Driver chose to play Ben for the short period he had - Ben would have been pretty fun to bounce off Poe and Finn, too. Finn especially, I think.
Plus you then get around the need to change Poe into “Han Zero Sugar” as a character, because the snippy smart-ass dangerous hero role is now being filled by repentant Ben, and you don’t have to hard-yank the steering wheel on Poe over towards that end of the character spectrum.
The more I think about it (and your explanation really helps) the more I sort of wish that had been an option ANYONE had pitched or considered. The idea of the subversion in TROS being “how about we just turn Kylo IMMEDIATELY. Let’s just do it”
But to get back to the big Reylo discush - I just don’t feel like she wants to be with him AT ALL. She kind of wanted to in TLJ maybe, but mostly because they can use him, not because she LIKES him. I get the sense HE wants to legit seduce her (he moves on her at her weakest/most vulnerable, definitely, in that hut), and I believe he’s into that idea, but I don’t really get the sense it’s a thing she’s into. She’s maybe willing to USE that to bring him to her side, but like Luke says “This isn’t going to go the way you think,” and it doesn’t.
She says “I would have taken BEN’S hand” but that’s the biggest problem with the “romance” in TROS - before the kiss, that’s really the only sign she even likes him, much less wants to be with him. She says it out loud but she doesn’t show it, and she only says it after having actually killed him and then healed him - and the way she heals him is kind of a dig, too, haha.
I love that bit too, and I think it’s really cool - but I don’t feel that there’s a lot of evidence that SHE wants Kylo. I can see Kylo being like “hell yes,” but I don’t think it’s coming back the other way.
But then again - if they flip him at the end of the 1st act, her falling for him FOR REAL suddenly becomes a lot more possible, too.
You know what I really like about that post? The idea that Kylo renounces the dark side early. WAY early. In fact, I think all my tentative feelings with his redemption get drastically minimized if it’s not presented as a big movie (and saga) ending reward, but if it’s an end-of-first-act thing in response to something really horrible and awful that Hux & the Knights of Ren do. At which point the big fight between Kylo and Rey is almost 100% one-sided where he’s just trying not to die while explaining that he wants to atone. And then… we start the 2nd act.
The character dynamics of THAT movie are drastically different (and kind of exciting) more-so than the sort of “we know he’s going to turn good by the end here” vibe that TROS and DOTF both had. The idea that the rest of the trio HAVE to interact with him now would be really, really interesting to see play out.
I also think Finn/Rey made more sense than Rey/Kylo (I don’t see a lot of romance on Rey’s part towards Kylo. I see some going the other direction, but she never really seems too into the idea on her part in either TFA or TLJ) but again, I think the best possible romantic pairing in the sequel trilogy was Finn/Poe. The only thing really going for Rey/Finn however is the stray hints at it in TFA that didn’t really get picked up on in TLJ - although the hug when Finn and Rey reunite definitely has more going for it on an emotional level than Rose kissing Finn. But then again - Poe introducing himself to Rey basically signals that Finn/Rey is out of the question going forward if they stick with Trevorrow, and it’s only possible in TROS if JJ remembers what he was kind of trying to do in TFA with those two… and he apparently didn’t.
The biggest problem with any Rey pairing is that there’s not really enough work put into any of the movies to suggest she even needs the romantic aspect to be addressed, much less addressed the way it was in TROS. And even in that movie - it only happens very, very late in the movie (she spends most of TROS exceedingly angry with Kylo, tries to kill him twice before ACTUALLY KILLING HIM but healing him before he can die), and that romance is taken off the board by his death almost immediately afterwards anyway.
The Rey/Poe romance was definitely staying, IIRC he specifically asked Rian to write the “I’m Poe/I’m Rey” scene at the end of The Last Jedi to accomodate it.
That’s not half the movie that you just described, though! Most of the general shape of the film, the plotting, was pretty similar. There were a lot of detail-level tweaks along the way but I don’t think a lot of what Abrams/Kasdan came up with during their phone calls changed too drastically once they started hammering out the script. For example, the Force-vision was different - but it was still a Force-vision that essentially covered the same ground. The saber IIRC, WAS effectively the map to Skywalker. A lot of what did get changed was streamlining and cutting, not necessarily inventing new things to replace old ideas wholesale.
They were working really fast, and didn’t have a lot of time to drastically change the shape of the plot once they laid it down. Almost all the beats are exactly the same, and it’s almost all the same people hitting those beats. It’s just a matter of shaving stuff down and compressing what’s left. The biggest addition was probably Poe still living. The biggest subtraction was probably the Sledgehammer stuff.
It’s not very much like what happened with “The Star Wars” on the way to “Star Wars” where only the vaguest shape stayed in place and almost EVERYTHING got rearranged on the way to the finish line. Arcs, relationships, plots, basic concepts…
I think Trevorrow had probably changed as much of the structure and shape of Duel of the Fates as he was going to change with that later draft we kind of know about, which is probably why he got axed, because that was as far as he could take the idea and have it remain coherent. And then it seems like the next step was him agreeing to maybe polish whatever Jack Thorne turned in when he was hired, and then him looking at Thorne’s draft and going “yeeeesh.”
I think it’s safe to say that we weren’t getting too many more changes for DOTF beyond what that later draft was. It would have had some cosmetic detailing and shifts here and there, but I think you’d have gotten (if they’d let him) something pretty recognizable to the story as we’ve read it in that first draft.
But I’d say stacking DOTF up against the drafts for really any of the other SW films isn’t unreasonable.
But we’re not stacking this movie against any of the other ones. My whole point was that the direct comparison to Star Wars (1974) isn’t a good one.
Yes, movies change across drafts. Not arguing that. But the degree to which they change (and specifically, the degree to which STAR WARS changed from 73-77) isn’t as easy to reliably measure from movie to movie, and especially not considering the different circumstances in context surrounding the productions of those specific movies.
It’s not ever going to be 1:1 - but you’ll get closer using better examples.
I sincerely doubt the final product of TFA was about 70% the same as the first draft.
I think it was pretty close. I also think there weren’t that many drafts, either. I think it might have been something like 2 1/2, haha.
That’s about 1 1/2 more than Attack of the Clones got
But the process is the same whether you take years or months.
This isn’t true at all. The process isn’t the same from movie to movie often, much less across multiple decades in an industry that has changed a lot.
The process now is not the same as it was in the '70s. If Star Wars was made then the way ALL blockbusters are made now, we wouldn’t have gotten to draft 4, because when Ladd greenlit it, he’d have greenlit it with a release date locked and everything would have been set to that clock. Star Wars didn’t have a clock put on it until much, much later in the development process. The clock still almost drove Lucas insane, but he got a lot of time to develop that script that is damn near impossible to get now.
It’s a different machine creators are working in. Or rather, the engine and the gears move differently than they did when Lucas was around. Lucas is partially the reason that machine now operates the way it does, thanks to his efforts in the early 00s. Comparing the script development of Star Wars in 74 to Trevorrow’s efforts in 2017 is a comparison that isn’t worth much because not only are the creatives in question pretty wildly different, but the process is also pretty wildly different now, too.