Discussion in 'Arts & Entertainment' started by EgonSpengler, Aug 15, 2014.
Definitely excellent now that I've watched the full version.
Not sure I follow....
I'd almost forgotten myself.
Nah, you have to watch the last two seasons of GoT to see how they write. Almost nobody dies. They was only killin' them protagonists cause it's what ol' RR wrote for them.
New Vanity Fair article with several bts images. (I love Keri Russell's outfit! And, finally the Knights of Ren!)
Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker, The Ultimate Preview
It was a good read.
‘In the first draft, Luke was an old man, Leia was 14, and Han Solo was “a huge green-skinned monster with no nose and large gills.”’
Go, Comic Irregulars, go!
Rey is also, according to totally unsubstantiated Internet theories, a leading candidate to be the Skywalker of the title, pending some kind of head-snapping reveal about her ancestry. (For the record, the other leading unsubstantiated Internet theory has the “Skywalker” of the title referring to an entirely new order of Force users who will rise up and replace the Jedi.)
Somebody has been reading Gori.
The title has five distinct meanings (well four, plus a sop to Sommer)
1) the rise of Rey from obscurity to being known as a Skywalker
2) the moral rise of Ben when he atones for killing Han by a heroic self-sacrifice that takes out Snoke-Plagueis for good
3) the rise of Anakin in Shmi as a Force-counter-reaction to Plagueis bringing someone (or himself) back to life for the first time
4) the rise of "Skywalkers" in the place of Jedi/Sith. They'll be lazer-sword-wielding do-gooders.
5) Luke will appear as a force ghost
Yeah, well, until the movie comes out they're "unsubstantiated." But once it does, it will be the movie itself substantiating them! You'll see!
Unsurprisingly, I disagree.
Don't forget that in countries with gendered nouns, The Last Jedi was rendered in the plural form.
And the director of the film said in an interview that he had laboured on said film under the impression that the word was in the singular.
One would think that the director wouldn't be "under the impression" about the title of the film he is working on. If he was then that goes a long way towards explaining that mess.
Yes, there was a lot of executive interference. :/
Disney is moving to exploit Knights of the Old Republic now that their rape of the Original Trilogy has failed. Boycott, boycott, boycott.
One assumes that they're not going to simply regurgitate the game in film, because everyone knows how badly video game films tend to do. If they don't do that, how bad could it really be?
(The Prequels were widely panned, but even they have their good points.)
I thought Star Wars: Battlefront was a resounding hit I've never played it, but my younger siblings rant and rave all the time about how great it was.
I think that's just a result of lazy cash-grabs by game companies, along with a 'self-fulfilling prophecy' effect as writers and producers take quality scripts/material away from films they think are going to bomb anyway. There's no reason why a movie based on a video game can't be good.
Regurgitating the game's plot will hurt Kotor's legacy, so I oppose that, but it would make for a better Star Wars movie than anything Disney has put out.
Unwise to ask these sorts of things.
They'll get Uwe Boll?
Is it really a boycott if you weren't going to buy it anyway?
Separate names with a comma.