ROGUE ONE WEEKEND THREAD | Actuals R1 155.09m, Moana 12.7m, OCP 8.58m, CB 7.1m, FB 5.07m

[Dark 33Legend of the Sith]

I grew up with original trilogy. Return of the Jedi was one of my first theatre movies I watched. Yes, it is incredible to have a Star  wars movie after a long wait. Yes, there is a palpable hype and electricity in the theatres for a Star Wars movie when they don't come around often. I was a little concerned about killing these moments by over saturation when Disneys plan was announced.

 

But I'm to the point where it's incredibly exciting to have a star wars movie each year and not have to wait 15 years between trilogies. I mean, how cool is it to have a movie about ANH's opening crawl?!

 

No doubt, there won't be as much hype as each year passes. But if Rogue One is any indicator, the possibilities are truly endless. And if they can keep the films in hands of great directors, ill trade some diminishing hype/and box office $ for some incredible movies from my most beloved franchise.

[JonathanLB]

Just now, MovieMan89 said:

Good luck finding a film franchise that went past three movies that a majority of people will think were all great. There is a big enough sample size to be confident that this will inevitably lead to what most consider as lackluster films. Honestly, you guys are being way too stubborn in your fanboy-ism right now. I understand SW had been dead for a decade and this is only the second year of its return, but just think about the future for one second. 

 

I am. The future is very bright! After two amazing movies, we get another hopefully great one next year. The franchise is strong!

[EmpireCity]

4 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

This I will agree with. Still doesn't change my opinion on the film existing as a cash grab because the people working on it aren't the ones that got to decide it would exist. 

 

The funniest thing about this is you don't even know the actual definition of a cash/money grab but keep using it like it means something it doesn't.  

 

If you do know the actual definition and are still using it then you are really cementing yourself as not to be taken seriously again.  

[Dementeleus]

8 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

I called R1 a cash grab long before I saw the movie. All the Anthology films greenlit so far are, it doesn't matter to me if Christopher Nolan is directing them. 

 

And yet you were a huge supporter of TFA, arguably the cash grabbiest cash grab in the history of cash grabs. 

[Porthos]

BTW, if Disney was truly about a cash grab, I tend to think they would have mandated editoral changes in R1 to make it more wide appealing.

 

That they didn't (and they CLEARLY didn't IMO) gives more weight to me that LFL is in near-complete control of the SW franchise right now when it comes to putting out content.

 

So if folks want to whine about oversaturation, start with George Lucas (who came up with the idea of the standalones to keep the SW brand alive in the public's mind), Kathleen Kennedy (who has been implenenting that vision, along with charting her own course), and about every damn person at Lucasfilm from the executives all the way down to the artists working away at keyboards.

 

They're the ones who want to do it.  Disney is mostly reaping the rewards and helping maximize esposure (as well as making a mint on side projects ).

Edited December 17, 2016 by Porthos

[Jandrew]

Seeing RO at 7 with mom. 

[4815162342]

Just now, MovieMan89 said:

. Honestly, you guys are being way too stubborn in your fanboy-ism right now. I understand SW had been dead for a decade and this is only the second year of its return, but just think about the future for one second. 

 

1) I'm not gonna speculate based upon a model that has only been done once before AND done in a substantially different manner.

 

2) We get it, you did not like Rogue One. So your perspective, opinion, and outlook is already locked into your own point. Demanding that those of us who liked or loved Rogue One share your view of the state of the franchise is kinda ludicrous. I see Rogue One as reason for optimism for how Lucasfilm is gonna develop the franchise. You didn't like the movie, so you're already disposed to think the opposite.

 

3) I'm gonna judge each movie as it comes, based on the information I have. That's not stubborn, that's just not going hog-wild either way and being reasonable.

[SWXII]

17 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

I legitimately can't wait to read the meltdowns over Star Wars saturation in 5-8 years. When this whole board falls into that mob mentality it's going to make my complaints look tame. 

 

Never going to happen. Disney will put production in hiatus for a few years before they let fatigue set in. Not that I believe fatigue is even possible.

 

One trilogy per decade seems right with the rest in single or 1 sequel offerings. IMO.

[MovieMan89]

Just now, Grand Moff Tele said:

 

And yet you were a huge supporter of TFA, arguably the cash grabbiest cash grab in the history of cash grabs. 

Wrong. The movie could have been made at so many points in history before it was. It was literally decades in the making until it was felt it could be done right. Nothing about that makes it exclusively a cash grab. Developing a subplot we knew everything about 40 years ago to capitalize on people's current Star Wars fever is the cashiest cash grab in the history of cash grabs. 

[Mulder]

2 minutes ago, Grand Moff Tele said:

 

And yet you were a huge supporter of TFA, arguably the cash grabbiest cash grab in the history of cash grabs. 

Yeeeah this. As much as I love how TFA turned out, they really wanted that cash.

2 minutes ago, Porthos said:

BTW, if Disney was truly about a cash grab, I tend to think they would have mandated editoral changes in R1 to make it more wide appealing.

 

That they didn't (and they CLEARLY didn't IMO) gives more weight to me that LFL is in near-complete control of the SW franchise right now when it comes to putting out content.

 

So if folks want to whine about oversaturation, start with George Lucas (who came up with the idea of the standalones to keep the SW brand alive in the public's mind), Katheleen Kennedy (who has been implenenting that vision, along with charting her own course), and about every damn person at Lucasfilm from the executives all the way down to the artists working away at keyboards.

 

They're the ones who want to do it.  Disney is mostly reaping the rewards and helping maximize esposure (as well as making a mint on side projects ).

Also this. Rogue One is so dark and depressing and un-child friendly ((Both times I saw it, the kids walking out looked shell-shocked and disturbed)) that if Disney was micro managing this then we wouldn't get Rogue One.

[Mulder]

1 minute ago, MovieMan89 said:

Wrong. The movie could have been made at so many points in history before it was. It was literally decades in the making until it was felt it could be done right. Nothing about that makes it exclusively a cash grab. Developing a subplot we knew everything about 40 years ago to capitalize on people's current Star Wars fever is the cashiest cash grab in the history of cash grabs. 

[EmpireCity]

I was wrong, @MovieMan89 actually did spell out what a cash grab is and that makes it even more sad.  

 

Disney/Lucasfilm has invested BILLIONS into Star Wars and are putting tons of talent taking years of their lives to make these movies.  They have a ton of effort going into these movies and the amount of money and dedication and planning they are showing proves it is anything but a cash grab.  It is insulting to everyone involved to even imply it.  

[GiantCALBears]

3 minutes ago, Grand Moff Tele said:

 

And yet you were a huge supporter of TFA, arguably the cash grabbiest cash grab in the history of cash grabs. 

Yeah, this is under Bob Iger's office. 

 

[Porthos]

10 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

This I will agree with. Still doesn't change my opinion on the film existing as a cash grab because the people working on it aren't the ones that got to decide it would exist. 

 

But is something a cash grab if the suits who greenlight it don't interfere?  I would say no, because as you have repeatedly said and insuinuated: Cash grab implies inferior product where the people making it don't care if it is good or not.

 

The way I see it, you're upset that Disney is funding it.  Well all Disney is really doing is letting people who want to make something make it.  Doesn't mean you have to want to see what they make.  But a bunch of very driven artists and creators are being given practically a blank check to do whatever the hell they want with a property.

 

That's on some level fairly radical.  

 

If the folks who were making the new product were a bunch of cyncial bastards out to make a quick buck, I could understand your complaints more.  But since they aren't, I don't.

Edited December 17, 2016 by Porthos

[MovieMan89]

5 minutes ago, Dark 33Legend of the Sith said:

 

But I'm to the point where it's incredibly exciting to have a star wars movie each year and not have to wait 15 years between trilogies. I mean, how cool is it to have a movie about ANH's opening crawl?!

 

Oh my god, how are people actually arguing with me about this being a cash grab? Give me a freaking break. Say you like the movie, that's your opinion. Don't say it didn't exist exclusively to be a cash grab. That's being unreasonable. 

[EmpireCity]

Disney exists to entertain people and do everything in their power to make it the best they possibly can.  They have been doing this for decades and their founder was passionate about entertaining people.  The money is a nice result of their efforts, but it is secondary to trying to put out a quality product.  

[Blankments]

13 hours ago, Cochofles said:

 

Jlaw and Pratt are not in LLL.

Unless you really think that Stone (kinda sorta close) and Gosling (hell no!) are two of the biggest stars in Hollywood.

I'd say Gosling and Stone are both in the top ten of their gender of most famous actors working currently. Gosling might not have a lot of financial successes, but he's well liked by the GA and people typically show up to see him in romantic roles (which LA LA LAND fits in)

[Mulder]

Just now, MovieMan89 said:

Oh my god, how are people actually arguing with me about this being a cash grab? Give me a freaking break. Say you like the movie, that's your opinion. Don't say it didn't exist exclusively to be a cash grab. That's being unreasonable. 

Dude you can't expect people to just universally agree that it only exists as a cash grab, come on now.

[MovieMan89]

Some of you are such hypocrites. If you hated the film you'd be screaming "cash grab" from the mountain top. I said cash grab way before I ever had an opinion on the film, because the two things have nothing to do with each other. 

[Daxtreme]

MovieMan in this thread