Abrams on Disney-ifying Star Wars Comments - Mania.com


Showing items 11 - 20 of 20
<<  <  1 2 
CalamityJohnson 10/1/2013 11:29:21 AM

there is a vast difference between kid friendly (Star Wars IV-VI) and just plain inane and foolish (Star Wars I-III). Just look at the difference in aliens from the first movies and the prequels, how cartoonish and "Pokemonish" the new aliens introduced in the new movies are. How absurd and juvenile the jokes and dialog was. It felt so unreal and faked and forced. Both sides aren't even human. Clones vs droid wars? Please. It's like there's no consequence because very few real sentients are being killed aside from artificials and AI's. If you take out the consequence of war, war has no meaning or value (for either side)... and therefore no suspense. So, his prequel efforts have now tainted IV-VI. Are we to understand that the fearsome stormtroopers are clones as well? That makes them so much less formidable and daunting. It feels like a gut punch. The first kid friendly movies may have been aimed at 12 year olds, but pleased the whole family. Truly, the prequels were aimed at pleasing 5 year olds. HUGE difference. I would think that most 12 year olds would have thought the prequels were at best watchable, but by no means a theatrical experience on the level of IV-VI.

So, yes, the worry is a valid concern. I'm tired of folks pretending it isn't. The prequels were nowhere close to the prestige and quality of those in the 70's/80's. They were inferior for a number of reasons, and one very big one was this - not trusting an audience to understand the quanderies of life and death so much so that they attempt to eliminate the consequences for it and/or insert dialog/aliens so absurd and ridiculous in an effort to appease the anime saturated child audience at the EXPENSE of its adult audience, which the Skywalker/Solo/Leia movies NEVER did.

redvector 10/1/2013 1:29:35 PM

I agree with everything  Calamity Johnson and Warcry said and would add one more point. Ultimately the prequels were pointless. They were better off leaving what happened to trigger Anakin's transformation into Darth Vader to the imagination. Or it could have been told in a flashback sequence in Return of the Jedi without dragging it out over three movies.

almostunbiased 10/1/2013 1:57:15 PM

I did hate Jar Jar.  My kids did like him.  Thing is I LOVED C3PO and Artoo and yet I did not enjoy C3PO in the new movies.  He changed as well.  He wasn't funny in the new ones, but was so funny in the old ones.  just sayin.

Redshirt1 10/1/2013 5:59:15 PM

 I saw the first Star Wars back in 1977 when I was eight. It seemed pretty kid friendly to me seeing how I was a freaking kid when I saw it! Granted I didn't like episodes 1-3, but that had nothing to do with making it even more kid friendly. It had to do with bad writing, plot inconsistencies and some pretty stupid character concepts. Not to mention some really piss poor acting. Especially that kid they got to play Anakin. Star Wars is an action adventure movie for kids, get over it.

mike10 10/1/2013 7:17:40 PM

Did I miss something? When was the new Star Wars movie pushed back? Production begins in January 2015? Another story has the movie being released in 2017, 40 years after A New Hope?

goldeneyez 10/2/2013 5:29:04 AM

Calamity, I agree with you, but your choice of avatar is pretty ironic (no disrespect meant).  Although, The Clone Wars was much better than the prequels probably because they had time to develop characters and stories with a bit more depth than the prequels did.

redhairs99 10/2/2013 7:52:54 AM

 mike10, I think that's a typo.  The sentence says that hopefully we'll have more news around the holidays (as in this year) as filming is scheduled to begin in January (should be 2014).  Last I saw the movie is still scheduled for the extremely overcrowded summer of 2015.

CalamityJohnson 10/2/2013 12:43:57 PM

@Goldeneyz: you will notice i mentioned episodes I-III and said nothing about the cartoon which I felt was very well done. If any of the toons (even the 5 min shorts that preceded the 5 year series) had been made into movies with RL actors they would have exceeded I-III by a light year. There is no excuse when the writing and the voice acting of a cartoon FAR outperforms (in quality) THREE movies where a gazillion dollars and countless man hours were spent to produce. Just. Boggles. The. F'ing. Mind.

karas1 10/7/2013 12:55:20 PM

There is no reason that new Star Wars films need to be gritty or ultra violent or show gore, cursing or nudity.  They should be clean enough for anybody to watch, even young kids.  That doesen't mean they have to be simplistic or silly. 

I was 11 years old during the summer of '77.  I saw Star Wars in the theater.  It was fantastic!  My younger brother and both my parents saw it with me and we all loved it. 

There seems to be such a disconnect now.  Any movie made for adults has to be full of violence, nudity, gore and bad language or is isn't "adult" enough to be taken seriously by an adult audience.  Any movie made for children has to be simplistic, silly and stupid, particurlarly if it is live action.   Only animated movies seem to be able to get away with being interesting to both adults and children.  This is sad.


CalamityJohnson 10/8/2013 3:53:16 PM

@karas1 - At no point in this conversation has anyone mentioned or advocated for gore, nudity, or cursing. We just don't want to be treated as imbeciles... I-III assumed we would adore and fawn over a ludicrous story with unbelievable characters, horrible acting, and even worse script writing. They were just not good movies aside from occasional good CGI and a good lightsaber battle here and there. Yes, even children notice the difference as my six year old and 13 year old don't go near I-III but rewatch IV-VI with abandon along with our Clone War collection. In an effort to make even more "child friendly" viewing he offended EVERYONE'S intelligence with his inane filth. Good riddance George...

<<  <  1 2 


You must be logged in to leave a comment. Please click here to login.