New Star Wars films yearly from 2015..
- Thread starter Kirov Reporting
- Start date
Recommended Videos
So basically they're doing with movies what we've been doing with Star Wars EU books for the last 30 or so years? I'm optimistic about the whole thing tbh. I've been reading a lot of old Star Wars comics lately and some of the story arcs would be great movies. Star Wars is a franchise these days and not a series so it's similar to how there're something like 50 Final Fantasy titles but they typically don't overlap and sometimes have cameos from other games without totally rupturing canon. (Cloud from FFVII in Tactics and Dissidia for example)
Edit: Come to think of it, we have yearly Marvel movies so what's the difference?
Edit: Come to think of it, we have yearly Marvel movies so what's the difference?
A New Hope (1977)
Empire Strikes Back (1980)
Return of the Jedi (1983)
-
The Phantom Menace (1999)
Attack of the Clones (2002)
Revenge of the Sith (2005)
Whatever Lucas's failings might be, he at least knew that post-production takes time.
CAPTCHA: are you ready
No, not really.
Empire Strikes Back (1980)
Return of the Jedi (1983)
-
The Phantom Menace (1999)
Attack of the Clones (2002)
Revenge of the Sith (2005)
Whatever Lucas's failings might be, he at least knew that post-production takes time.
CAPTCHA: are you ready
No, not really.
I don't know, dude. I'd be really pissed if he turned Star Wars into distracting but shitty popcorn fare like he did with Star Trek.OneCatch said:
As for his other work: Loved Lost until it descended into stupidity. Now I'm pissed he wasted my time. Ditto for Fringe. Cloverfield is okay. Revolution is shit. Haven't seen Super 8. Based on my viewing experience, though, the guy doesn't know how to close. Gotta have a good #3 for a good trilogy. I don't think we'll get one with him.
I don't really fully understand the argument, Disney over the last several years has put out a lot of good stuff, and not just "fo da kiddies!" things either, however people still seem to believe that Disney is still for under 12's only. I see people cry over the loss of Lucas Arts, claiming Disney is the new EA. Do people really know what Lucas Arts did? They actually did not make many of the games people remember them for, the last game Lucas Arts actually developed was Lucidity back in 2009 for Xbox360. If you want to look at Co-Developed games you can go to their last title, Star Wars: The Force Unleashed 2 in 2010 which if I recall correctly, was not well received.
When people think about Lucas Arts, they say things like KOTOR (2003), Battlefront (2004), and Jedi Knight 2/Jedi Academy (2002, 2003). KOTOR was developed by Bioware, Battlefront was made Pandemic not Lucas Arts, and Jedi Knight was made by Raven Software and Vicarious Visions.
Do people really miss Lucas Arts as a company? or as an icon. Do they really miss the Lucas Arts developed games like Republic Commando (2005), Gladius (2003), and Star Wars: Bounty Hunter (2002)? Or do people just miss seeing the 'Gold Guy' logo come up before a Star Wars title. I do not understand why people cry foul at George Lucas for 'Ruining' Star Wars, yet absolutely refuse to have someone else take a shot at it, despite that 'person' having been responsible for the biggest multi movie tie-in, The Avengers, and really showing people that Comic characters are not just for geeks.
When people think about Lucas Arts, they say things like KOTOR (2003), Battlefront (2004), and Jedi Knight 2/Jedi Academy (2002, 2003). KOTOR was developed by Bioware, Battlefront was made Pandemic not Lucas Arts, and Jedi Knight was made by Raven Software and Vicarious Visions.
Do people really miss Lucas Arts as a company? or as an icon. Do they really miss the Lucas Arts developed games like Republic Commando (2005), Gladius (2003), and Star Wars: Bounty Hunter (2002)? Or do people just miss seeing the 'Gold Guy' logo come up before a Star Wars title. I do not understand why people cry foul at George Lucas for 'Ruining' Star Wars, yet absolutely refuse to have someone else take a shot at it, despite that 'person' having been responsible for the biggest multi movie tie-in, The Avengers, and really showing people that Comic characters are not just for geeks.
Did you really just suggest that it takes about the same amount of time to make a book as it does to make a movie? Would you like to refine that statement?Deshin said:
As for the Final Fantasy situation: Final Fantasy isn't a shared universe. Each of the stories of Final Fantasy are distinct, and most have no overlap whatsoever. You cannot have that many world-ending catastrophes and still have a population left at all. Star Wars has continuity. I don't think there's any comparison to be made here.
I don't know why they're so keen on saturating the market with Star Wars movies. I get that the non-numbered films are to flesh out the universe, build some continuity and what not, but that's what you have other media for like, maybe, VIDEOGAMES?
Nope, nope. The actual new trilogy will be spaced out with a couple years in between, and a random side story entry for the years without numbered entries (the ones I know are possibly in the works are a young Han Solo story, and Seven Samurai but in space). Think of it like Call of Duty - Modern Warfare every other year, and Black Ops in between.R.Nevermore said:
You do realize that just because a company managed one franchise well, that doesn't mean that they are infallible when it comes to license management, right?Pyragma said:
Also, Disney has released some absolute garbage, too, so I don't understand your "not just 'fo da kiddies'" statement. Disney's been making movies for all ages for decades. Disney made Tron. They also made John Carter. What's your point?
Finally, yes, I miss Lucas Arts. They were an excellent company before Lucas ruined them by forcing them to milk Star Wars. I'd hoped Disney's resuscitative efforts would extend to Lucas Arts, as well, and now I'm sad. KOTOR was pre-EA Bioware, which no longer exists (case in point, ME3) so I still give significant credit to Lucas, and Lucas Arts released a lot of good non-Star Wars related games because they had an excellent eye for talent, and now that tradition has no hope of being restored because the company is no more.
I will be stunned if Abrams doesn't make Star Wars into another Star Trek 09'.PhiMed said:
Actual Star Trek (in tone and purpose) was dead well before Abrams got ahold of the corpse.
The only reason the Star Trek reboot exists is to exploit the franchise for money.
Whether or not you enjoy the film, that's the reason.
Star Wars is in the same boat. Hell, I'd argue it's been there since 1999, when George Lucas exploited the shit out of Star Wars just to make money (the prequel trilogy is the direct result of that).
I suspect that Disney hired Abrams because that he can produce exactly that kind of film.
It's the kind one would want if they were making a film for the purpose of exploiting merchandising. (while still putting some distance between the script and George Lucas)
That isn't to say the films won't be entertaining in a flashy sort of way, but just because Disney gave Marvel* a break doesn't mean that they will be so benevolent to Star Wars. I won't complain if they do produce something on par with The Avengers, but I am not so naive as to expect it.
(*as some have implied as airtight proof; conveniently forgetting how the rest of the Disney empire is built on franchise exploitation; and after Cars 2, not even Pixar is safe anymore)
They didn't kill the IP. Some other company that actually wants it and can do something with it will buy it up (Disney IS selling the IPs). I'm not sure why people incorrectly think that a development studio going under necessarily means the IP dies. The IP only dies if the copywrite expires or if no one has a legitimate claim to it (the IP owner dies with no heir to the rights). Take the death of THQ, notice that Metro Last Light is still being made by the same actual developers and will be out soon? That's because Koch Media (Deep Silver) purchased the rights.OneCatch said:
For some IPs, there is nothing better than the person holding them being forced to let go. Seeing how LucasArts had been treating them lately, this may very well be the case.
Yes, I'll complain or not complain when I actually see this in action. If any company has the means to make an annual release it's Disney. From what I can see, they've made some good decisions with the IP so far.
To be honest, Lucasarts shut themselves down. First they killed off any franchise they had that wasn't Star Wars, then they farmed out development of Star Wars game to lots of different companies and slapped their sticker on them.OneCatch said:
Then, despite delivering some of the most successful Star Wars games ever (you know, Rogue Squadron, KotOR, Battlefront, Force Unleahed, little stuff) they either nix development on sequels entirely or inexplicably hand total control over to EA (fucking EA!). Having relieved themselves of all their valuable ongoing franchises they decide to make a game themselves... it's Kinect Star Wars.
That left them with 1313, an all new, completely unproven game with no release date.
Then Disney comes along and ask them to justify spending tens of millions finishing it and what else did Lucasarts have to justify their expensive continued existence, the silence must have been deafening.
Now, having said all that, I don't hold much hope for Disney Star Wars games. They seem to have little idea or little interest in making games work as a stand alone medium. The movies I think will be fine, they're making Marvel work, the games, not so much.
It's not they're having only one group pooping out a movie every year. Releases will alternate yearly between the next trilogy and other films in the IP, starting in 2015. The first spin off is rumored to be about Yoda. How are you complaining about that which will give us more Yoda?
Yes, this is why they've divided up and are selling off the LucasArts game IPs to companys that want and can afford them.fix-the-spade said:
This could potentially be the best possible thing that could happen to our beloved titles.
Erm...Kirov Reporting said:
They've been releasing Marvel movies yearly, and their new plan is to release two of them per year. Iron Man 3 and Thor 2 are both coming out this year, Captain America 2 and Guardians are both coming out next year, and Avengers 2 and Ant Man are coming out the same year(Though I wouldn't be surprised if Ant Man got pushed to 2016).
Their plan with SW looks almost identical to what they're doing with Avengers, release one of the main series every 3 years or so(Episode 7/8/9, Avengers 1/2/3), with a bunch of smaller movies in between.
But it could also be the worst.Lightknight said:
The kind of money Disney will want for a Star Wars license really limits who'll be in the running.
It'll pretty much be the big publishers, EA, Actibliz, Squenix, Ubisoft, Sega, no actual developers have the kind of money Disney will be demanding (maybe Zenimax/Valve/Epic do, but as if they'll go for a Star Wars game). None of them will do anything odd, risky or adventurous, doubly so after TOR has tanked.
Of course, if Disney announce that they're funding an Obsidian developed game, with the option for two more if the first sells, that would be interesting.