By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Movies & TV - Colin Trevorrow Exits Star Wars Episode 9; Disney will announce new Director at a later date

mZuzek said:
AngryLittleAlchemist said:
This entire trilogy is a creative failure

This.

What a complete mess this franchise has become.

And what happens to this theory if/when Epsiode VIII turns out to be good? 



Around the Network
Smartie900 said:
Good. I don't want a Jurassic World type movie in Star Wars. TBH though, I feel this guy is legitimately talented and has just been getting screwed by the production companies.

Let's not act like SW is suddenly high art and not a silly blockbuster.



Soundwave said:
AlfredoTurkey said:

Just read on theforce.net that he clashed with SJW/feminist KK over the script. Let this be a lesson to all future males attempting to work on Star Wars... you've better be a feminist and you'd better be on board with the SJW angle. 

Every single day that passes makes me miss Lucas more.

lol, Kathleen Kennedy has produced many of the most successful films of all time. 

George Lucas was done, dude couldn't write a dialogue scene without embarassing himself any longer. Watching actors like Natalie Portman and Sam Jackson try to desperately do their best with the lame shit they were given was painful, it was like watching an experienced actor trying to act in a play written by a 6th grader. 

Good on KK for moving quickly and giving Trevorrow the boot. Dude's last film sucked ass apparently, he never should've been given the job in the first place. 

I'd rather have genuine art which is messy than manufactured "product" that is made with only one goal in mind... money. KK has gone of RECORD (I can direct you to the video if you want) as saying that they're intentionally forcing diversity into these films at all costs. That's not "art"... that's fucking product. It's now all just focus groups and PR people at the helm, trying to capitalize on current trends. JJ went on record, admitting that they intentionally wanted to shoehorn people of color into the film... just cause. 

It's disgusting.



AlfredoTurkey said:
Soundwave said:

lol, Kathleen Kennedy has produced many of the most successful films of all time. 

George Lucas was done, dude couldn't write a dialogue scene without embarassing himself any longer. Watching actors like Natalie Portman and Sam Jackson try to desperately do their best with the lame shit they were given was painful, it was like watching an experienced actor trying to act in a play written by a 6th grader. 

Good on KK for moving quickly and giving Trevorrow the boot. Dude's last film sucked ass apparently, he never should've been given the job in the first place. 

I'd rather have genuine art which is messy than manufactured "product" that is made with only one goal in mind... money. KK has gone of RECORD (I can direct you to the video if you want) as saying that they're intentionally forcing diversity into these films at all costs. That's not "art"... that's fucking product. It's now all just focus groups and PR people at the helm, trying to capitalize on current trends. JJ went on record, admitting that they intentionally wanted to put women and black people into the film... just cause. It's disgusting.


George Lucas is a "SJW" too by the way, go take your conservative tears somewhere else if that's what you think is going on. Star Wars has been getting more diverse since Empire Strikes Back, Lucas is as liberal as they come. So not sure what freaking franchise you think you're talking about. 

Trevorrow couldn't put on his big boy pants and get the job done. Should never have been given the job in the first place, KK put him in his proper place. If VIII is good they should just let Johnson continue it, I always thought having completely different directors and letting them do their own scrpit in different directions was not a great idea to begin with. 



AngryLittleAlchemist said:

I mean, not really. 

You know, you might not know this, but there's this thing. It's called "production". And often times, the way you can produce something can be mishandled, but the sales you'll get on it can still be good. You can still make a profit! Does that mean the series isn't being mishandled? Not necessarily. During the production and creation of these films, it's a disaster. And as much as you want to use BO or critical acclaim it is not the be all end all of how something is handled. The prequels were also very successful, and a lot of people didn't even hate them till years after their original screening. I wouldn't say though that the development process of those films was handled correctly.

Either way, you care more about a word I said than the point of what i'm saying. Let's say we take the word mishandled completely out of the dictionary. What does that change about how effectively Disney is making product? Yeah - it's making an insane amount of profit. As if a Star Wars movie published by one of the biggest corporations on earth wouldn't. But that still means that during the production of the film - it's being poorly treated. So what is changed when you look at the actual point and not just some word you don't want to associate with a company? Nothing.

How can a production be mishandled when the finished product is a sucess ? Have you ever seen any Naughty Dog behind the scenes when they talk about how their game's production go ? Its generaly kind of a mess realy. Remember all the debacle with Amy Hennig's departure from UC 4 ? Maybe for you and for me the production would look like a disaster, but the fact of the mater is: whatever the hell it is they're doing, as screwed up, disorganized or crazy as it looks, it works. Whatever happens in production is only being mishandled if the finished product is suffering for it, so far it hasn't.

Also, again the prequels were not a sucess, did they make a lot of money ? Ye. Was that money good when you consider they were Star Wars movies. Not by a mile. Episode 3 made less money on the US than Ep IV (not adjusted), Ep IV came out like 30 years before III, thats insane, Episode II is the least grossing Star Wars movie of all time, even I wich did gross 1 billion worldwide pales when you consider Ep VII made over 2 billion and that if you adjust IV for inflation it also made over 2 billion. Also the franchise devalued after the prequels, and it is an urban legend that the movies were aclaimed on the time of release (one a lot of naysayers repeated to exhaustion after watching Ep VII and not agreing with the critics), you can go to Rotten Tomatoes, wich was around by the time of Eps 1, 2 and 3, scroll down the reviews till you get to release day reviews and see a plethora of negative ones (Ep1 released on 1999, RT came up on 2000 but basicaly all the reviews listed as 2000 there are launch day/week/month reviews they simply uploaded them when the site came up on January 1st of 2000). It was realy only a pocket of very eager fans that praized Ep I, overall that movie was trashed criticaly and on world of mouth (its the only rotten movieof the franchise on RT), so much so it damaged Ep 2's , wich is also not well received, BO beyond repair. 3 was received positively in general and did manage to save face for the franchise a little, however damage had been done, the brand lost value and a lot of steam, hence why it went to the fridge and ended up being sold 10 years later. 



Around the Network
DakonBlackblade said:

How can a production be mishandled when the finished product is a sucess. 

All that needs to be said tbh.

(oh and regarding your part about the prequels, yeah the money wasn't super duper impressive, but I think if the Disney films made that much you would have taken largely the same stance you have now on the Disney films. It's not like I was arguing the prequels were even super duper successful either, in fact my entire point was that the prequels were mishandled despite making a lot of money). 



AngryLittleAlchemist said:
DakonBlackblade said:

How can a production be mishandled when the finished product is a sucess. 

All that needs to be said tbh.

(oh and regarding your part about the prequels, yeah the money wasn't super duper impressive, but I think if the Disney films made that much you would have taken largely the same stance you have now on the Disney films. It's not like I was arguing the prequels were even super duper successful either, in fact my entire point was that the prequels were mishandled despite making a lot of money). 

Prequels did not make a lot of money relativley to what Star Wars make, they damaged the franchise, so your point is moot. The production there was in fact mishandled since it resulted in a poor product. Can you read minds now also or is your proficient simply making points you can't back with facts ? If the Disney films had been bad on the BO, and had been bad received by critics and word of mouth then their production would have been mishandled, even if they had had 0 directorials change or reshoots. All the shit that goes on production only matters if the end product isn't good.

Quick example: right now Justice Leagues production looks like a complete mess. If the movie comes out and its a smashing sucess, everyone likes the thing and it breaks BO records, well shit, guess having 2 directors with complete different views on the same movie and reshooting over 1 hour f your movie works great, kudos for DC. If the movie sucks then we will discuss what might've gone wrong in production, its as simple as that.



Lawlight said:
Smartie900 said:
Good. I don't want a Jurassic World type movie in Star Wars. TBH though, I feel this guy is legitimately talented and has just been getting screwed by the production companies.

Let's not act like SW is suddenly high art and not a silly blockbuster.

It isn't high art... but the original Star Wars movies had heart and charm to them that made them feel special. The story was always about a normal farmer boy trying to adapt to a situation that placed massive responsibility on to him. It was interesting to see him traverse around this unique and well realized world that Lucas created. There was character development for Luke that saw him progressively mature and become more used to the situation he was plunged into. I liken the original Star Wars trilogy to the original Spider-Man trilogy. While both had their moments of camp, they had personality and character that aren't present in most Hollywood movies. Jurassic World, while somewhat enjoyable... had absolutely no soul. That feeling of genuine warmth you get when watching certain movies is nowhere to be found in the new series. Force Awakens was decent.. but that was only because it followed the formula for A New Hope to an absolute T. Rogue One was just below average. Given Trevorrow's attempts on Jurrasic World, he was not the right choice to make these films seem less manufactured then they are.



 

 

DakonBlackblade said:
AngryLittleAlchemist said:

All that needs to be said tbh.

(oh and regarding your part about the prequels, yeah the money wasn't super duper impressive, but I think if the Disney films made that much you would have taken largely the same stance you have now on the Disney films. It's not like I was arguing the prequels were even super duper successful either, in fact my entire point was that the prequels were mishandled despite making a lot of money). 

Prequels did not make a lot of money relativley to what Star Wars make, they damaged the franchise, so your point is moot. The production there was in fact mishandled since it resulted in a poor product. Can you read minds now also or is your proficient simply making points you can't back with facts ? If the Disney films had been bad on the BO, and had been bad received by critics and word of mouth then their production would have been mishandled, even if they had had 0 directorials change or reshoots. All the shit that goes on production only matters if the end product isn't good.

Quick example: r If the movie sucks then we will discuss what might've gone wrong in production, its as simple as that.

Your point is so bad I can't take you seriously. I've said before and I'll say again : This discussion is moot. You care more about money than how something goes behind the scenes. That's fine, but that's not really "looking at the facts!" as you put it. That's just talking reception and money grossed versus how something is treated during development. The irony is that your point about Prequels didn't change anything. It's not like I ever said the prequels were as successful as the original or new trilogy, I just said they were successful. And no matter how much you want to say "but but but compare it to the original star wars ..." it doesn't change that they were successful. Two can play at this game : You can say nothing ever in the universe ever is being mishandled if it makes money, and I can say that as long as something makes a lot of money it's a success. But that was such a small part of this entire discussion that it just seems like you're grasping at straws. I'm sorry my liege that my example wasn't using the most popular of popular Star Wars movies! Please forgive me!!!! 

I mean just look at how narrow-minded your example is "Right now Justice Leagues production looks like a complete mess. If the movie comes out and its a smashing sucess, everyone likes the thing and it breaks BO records, well shit, guess having 2 directors with complete different views on the same movie and reshooting over 1 hour f your movie works great, kudos for DC." 

Really? That makes no sense and just goes to show that your mindset is nothing is ever mistreated during development if it makes money. Your own example doesn't even make sense because it shows a movie being successful despite it's bad handling rather than because of it - and yet you come to the conclusion that the awkward creation of the film is what lead it to being profitable? That makes no sense. It could be marketing, brand recognition, or the fact that genuinely good movies have been made despite being handled terribly during production. But you automatically make the connection that shitty handling during production must have been what caused it's success in your example? Absolutely ridiculous.

And after I wrote an entire paragraph a few replies ago about how you care too much for wording - you then again go back to "handling". Again, remove the word and what can you say against the idea that the production of these films are at least very faulty? I mean jesus, why do you even care about dfending a companies management of  a film franchise during production, in a thread about the production of a movie, if all you care about is the final product? That's not even what we're discussing! It's not like one or two missteps would trigger this response from me either. It seems like every Star Wars film Disney created has had similar issues, except maybe Force Awakens. Honestly at this point it's not worth discussing. I get that how a franchise is handled goes back to it's BO and critical performance, really I do. But i'm talking about how it's handled during production - and you're just not willing to talk on that level at all.  It would be fine if one or two of your points used post-production elements, but it's your entire argument! If you don't like what someone said about the production during a film, don't argue about the production of a film versus it's post production!



Smartie900 said:
Lawlight said:

Let's not act like SW is suddenly high art and not a silly blockbuster.

It isn't high art... but the original Star Wars movies had heart and charm to them that made them feel special. The story was always about a normal farmer boy trying to adapt to a situation that placed massive responsibility on to him. It was interesting to see him traverse around this unique and well realized world that Lucas created. There was character development for Luke that saw him progressively mature and become more used to the situation he was plunged into. I liken the original Star Wars trilogy to the original Spider-Man trilogy. While both had their moments of camp, they had personality and character that aren't present in most Hollywood movies. Jurassic World, while somewhat enjoyable... had absolutely no soul. That feeling of genuine warmth you get when watching certain movies is nowhere to be found in the new series. Force Awakens was decent.. but that was only because it followed the formula for A New Hope to an absolute T. Rogue One was just below average. Given Trevorrow's attempts on Jurrasic World, he was not the right choice to make these films seem less manufactured then they are.

I think people should just accept the original trilogy will never be beaten. Too many things went right for the OT, it was too groundbreaking, etc. etc. You can't top Darth Vader or Yoda or Han Solo or Emperor the "I'm your father" twist. 

The current movies will be "safe" solidly made films mostly like the Marvel movies are. Solid entertainment that don't have some of the more egregiously embarrassing moments the prequels did. There is like maybe 1 or 2 scenes total in the three prequels that actually work as scenes without having to be a lightsaber battle or space sequence.