Disney buys LucasFilms for $4.05 billion (1 Viewer)

[Carlo_M]

Yes. The negatives MAY be gone or may have been altered when the Special Editions were made but there's no way that all the OT prints are dust as the guy on Twitter suggests. There's private collectors that own prints of them.

Not to mention official archival entities like the Library of Congress.
Yes whomever does the restoration work may not have the original negatives to work from, but there are plenty of good sources that can be used.

 

I can't wait to see who will direct Episode 7. So many possibilities: Spielberg, Jackson, Del Toro, Whedon, Abrams, Bird, Nolan, Cameron, Yates. Should be interesting watching this unfold.

 

[Pete-D]

I'd nominate Brad Bird. I think he understands story structure and the last Mission: Impossible was way, waaaaay better than it had any business being. He's familiar to Disney and comes out of the Pixar family too.
Given Kathleen Kennedy's ties to Steven Spielberg though, if he really wanted to do the new one, that could be another way to go though as well.
They need to get the right writers and the right director and hopefully by the end of the year they'll have a director and can really focus on the first six months of 2013 on the script.

 

[Sean Bryan]

E!online claims a source at Lucasfilm says the new trilogy will be an original story not based on the books.
http://www.superherohype.com/news/articles/173435-the-new-star-wars-trilogy-will-an-original-story

 

[SilverWook]

I'm still trying to wrap my head around the fact there's another movie coming.
With all the crazy rumors and fake trailers that will be spawned, it's going to be a fun ride leading up to this.

 

[Tony J Case]

I'm a stuck record on this point, but geeks are like petulant, overgrown children when it comes to Lucas. Elsewhere on other Internet forums, it blows me away that people don't see the intellectual dishonesty of (for example) trying to pin everything "wrong" with Indy IV solely on him, while trying to shift the credit for the good movies he made in the '70s and '80s onto everyone other than him. Slag his '90s and '00s work if you want (though it's entirely pointless at this point), but trying to dismiss and discredit his entire career because, let's be honest, he hurt precious sensitive geek feelings with his later work, is shoddy behavior for people who are supposed to be film fans, not just emotion-driven fanboy mouthbreathers. When Coppola puts out a bad movie (which is as often as not, these days), he never receives that same kind of rabid hatred.

I really feel bad for Lucas, painted into the corner as he was. There he was, 16 years after the last star wars flick, nearly two decades of pent up Star Wars lust ready to explode. No movie - no event in human history - could have lived up to the expectations laid before the movie. Some of it was Lucas's fault, as the Hype Machine went into overdrive before the release, but most of it was just the collective geek world having sixteen years of pent up desire unleashing in a torrent of WANT! NOW! I don't think the movie could have lived up to expectations if Christ himself arranged the second coming on opening day and passed out bricks of solid gold wrapped in fine Belgium chocolate to everyone as they left the theater.
The other problem was The Lightning in a Bottle factor. Back in the seventies, it was a different time, more optimistic and open, where society was less jaded and more accepting to be washed away in a sense of wonder. More importantly, we had NEVER seen anything like Star Wars at that time, so it was fresh and new. Back in 1999, we had photo-realistic Dinosaurs, killer robot assassins form the future morphing into different people, and video games who's graphics far outpaced the special effects of most movies - all this on a daily, constant basis meant that George had to really up his A-Game of suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous geekdome. So when he delivers a C+ movie, the end result was inevitable.
Did Phantom Menace have problems? Of course - the movie does feel like 16 years of rust coming off the directorial hull and I could have done with less wacky Jar-Jar antics - but I will point out that Holy Trilogy are at times flawed too. It's just that the rose tinted glasses of youth and nostalgia allow folks who love and adore the old movies squirt liquid hate from every bodily orifice at Phantom Menace for more or less exactly the same problems.
Me? I'm just happy to enjoy the Star Wars magic no matter what the form.

He already made those crazy little movies no one wants to see. They were the prequels!

Okay, here's something I've never gotten. Lets say for a second that the first movie was as bad as everyone thinks, that the 1.5 billion dollars at the box office was a sheer fluke because everyone was in "I want to see Star Wars NOW" mode and didn't care about quality. Why then, if it was that bad, did Attack of the Clones make buckets of money? Shouldnt there have been a drop off, as the fair weather fans left the franchise.
But lets assume that both Menace and Clones was as horrible as everyone says. If that's the case, why didn't was the Sith box office a still impressive 848 million? If everyone hated as much as that, shouldn't Sith have made about 35 bucks in the theaters? Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice and so on? What about being fooled three times?

 

[JonZ]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4_dZPVg8KI

For those thinking this might mean hope for the OT on bluray, seems Fox still hold the rights..

http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/25397/fox-still-owns-the-original-star-wars

 

[Simon Massey]

. But lets assume that both Menace and Clones was as horrible as everyone says. If that's the case, why didn't was the Sith box office a still impressive 848 million? If everyone hated as much as that, shouldn't Sith have made about 35 bucks in the theaters? Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice and so on? What about being fooled three times?

I enjoy the prequels, but I don't see the continued box office as any sign of the quality of the movies. I loathe the Transformers films and am baffled by their success but they dont seem to be doing too bad despite 1 mediocre film and 2 awful sequels. Anyone expect the fourth film to be anything but a success ?Disney's acquisition and the level of interest even here show how irrespective of the prequels, Star Wars as a brand and point of interest was and remains unique.
It also wouldn't matter how bad the first two were - everyone was going to go and see how Anakin became Vader - it was the entire reason for the prequels existing in the first place.

 

[Greg_S_H]

Shouldn't matter that Fox owns the rights. I don't believe Disney would buy with a "but you have to bury the originals" clause in place, and literally nobody on earth but Lucas wants the originals suppressed, so Fox is going to say, "Well, we needed an excuse for another release, and the OOT is the big one." I have no remaining doubt that we'll finally get the release we've wanted, it's just a matter of when. That's about all I care about, not the idea of new movies.

 

[RobertR]

Didn’t see it coming.
The one part I’m kind of sad about is that the private company Lucas set up in the 70s in response to the corporate Hollywood machine will be gone.

Lucasfilm became a "corporate Hollywood machine" a long time ago. Rather ironic.

 

[SamT]

Indeed what Simon said. Transformers movies are awful but they sell well. box office doesn't mean a movie is good or not.

 

[TravisR]

I don't believe Disney would buy with a "but you have to bury the originals" clause in place...

Maybe Lucas has finally relented and signed a deal that will essentially allow them to release the originals (whether it's in conjunction with Fox or if it's after 2020) but I can't imagine the lack of them would be a dealbreaker for Disney in the slightest since the Special Editions have sold millions of copies for over 15 years now.

 

[Brandon Conway]

BTW, perfect thread to revisit one of the better Disneyland promotions ever:

 

[Chuck Mayer]

I'm so excited that the Internet will now be subject to prequel debates again. I really missed those from the early 2000s.
As I get older, I find brands (and Star Wars is absolutely a brand) reductive when it comes to storytelling, for the most part. That said, there may be some life in those old bones for some young, energetic film makers. While I would like to see original work from visionaries, I can see how the safety net established by an existing and incredibly popular brand will provide some measure of support, and has every chance of resulting in some fun films.
But we have effectively gotten a Bond every two to three years for the previous five decades. I'm watching and rewatching them in order, and about every other one is terrible. When something has to hit a release date every three years, sometimes standards slip. This may prove the exception to the rule, of course.
So, for the fans, I'm glad that opportunity is now present. I hope these films are everything y'all want and deserve.
Like I said, I'll be excited when we can discuss a movie and not a corporate announcement.

 

[Pete-D]

I think maybe even more than 50% of a good Star Wars movie is having fun characters who are relatable and have fun banter back and forth. Ditto for Indiana Jones.
That's really what made the OT go and that's really where the prequels fell short the most. The characters were flat and worse even boring in many cases, the romance and any on-screen chemistry felt completely forced. The one character who evoked some sense of mystery that you actually wanted to see more of (Darth Maul) was sliced in half after barely 7-8 minutes of screen time.
If you can get this aspect of Star Wars right, the rest of it is pretty easy. Just mix in a compelling villain and you're almost there.
The special effects stuff and the lightsaber choreography ... all that is easy nowadays, it's the "heart" of the movies -- likable, down to earth characters, believable romance, fun banter, and a little sprinkling of pop-philosophy -- that's what George got so right with the first Star Wars, and what got elevated almost to a level of high art with Empire Strikes Back, and was enough to get the OT to the finish line with ROTJ, Ewoks and all.
Get back to these basics and Disney will be laughing all the way to the bank with this deal. If they can't pin this aspect down though I think over time, the audience will start to dwindle eventually.
This is also where the new Star Trek succeeded most I think ... the characters are fun and have a lot of back and forth banter. You want to hang out with them. The story has a tinge of heart to it as well, right from the get go. The plot of the last Star Trek, honestly was pretty mediocre, but by and large the critics and audiences really enjoyed Star Trek, so I don't buy that these types of projects are inherently doomed to fanboy expectations. I mean it's not like rebooting Shatner/Nimoy was a concept not prone to going horribly, horribly wrong either.

 

[Brandon Conway]

Great thoughts, Pete. I agree - get a compelling group of heroes that have spirit/humor and a compelling baddy and the rest writes itself for the most part.

 

[joshEH]

Mark Hamill sounds off on Episodes VII, VIII, and IX today.
The worst thing that could happen to this new trilogy is it be a mirror to the prequels. We don't need to see any rise of power. We don't need to re-establish the world. Why the OT worked is that we were immediately pulled into it, unaware of what the hell was going on. If Episode VII starts at all, it should start with the shit having hit the fan again. A new force of evil. New chaos in the universe. Build a new mythology.
I don't mind if Luke plays a role in it. I would prefer he have some stake, in fact -- after all, the Skywalkers have a lasting legacy anyway, considering he was the start of the new Jedi.
Disney should be well aware of original trilogy fans from the past two decades of Star Wars, and there's one hell of a lot of bank to be made on the back of all the 40+-year-olds who'll flock to see Luke Skywalker in action again.

 

[Steve_Tk]

Haven't really seen this mentioned, but shouldn't Michael Bay be an option?

 

[Carlo_M]

Haven't really seen this mentioned, but shouldn't Michael Bay be an option?

That's brilliant! What better heir apparent to a John Williams score for the next Star Wars movie, than the bass line intro to Aerosmith's "Sweet Emotion"! (Michael Bay's Go-To band for any movie soundtrack)
I can totally hear it while reading the opening scroll...Episode VII, A New Threat has emerged in the Galaxy...Sweeeeeeeeet Emoooooooooshuuuuunnnn....

 

[Radioman970]

There would be suicide bombings.