1. Due to the increased amount of spam bots on the forum, we are strengthening our defenses. You may experience a CAPTCHA challenge from time to time.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Notification emails are working properly again. Please check your email spam folder and if you see any emails from the Cantina there, make sure to mark them as "Not Spam". This will help a lot to whitelist the emails and to stop them going to spam.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. IMPORTANT! To be able to create new threads and rate posts, you need to have at least 30 posts in The Cantina.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Before posting a new thread, check the list with similar threads that will appear when you start typing the thread's title.
    Dismiss Notice

REBOOT???

Discussion in 'Original Trilogy' started by 77th, Jul 2, 2016.

?

Do You Approve of a Star Wars Original Trilogy Full Remake

  1. Hell no! Sacred things must be untouched.

    36 vote(s)
    85.7%
  2. YEEEAH! Bring it on, I just wan't another SW Movie

    1 vote(s)
    2.4%
  3. I wouldn't like it BUT I definitely would watch it multiple times

    5 vote(s)
    11.9%
  4. Definitely, Original SW is old and outdated

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. Admiral Petty

    Admiral Petty Force Sensitive

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2015
    Posts:
    1,221
    Likes Received:
    4,562
    Trophy Points:
    11,592
    Credits:
    6,344
    Ratings:
    +5,783 / 13 / -0
    That good sir would be an awful idea.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  2. 77th

    77th Force Sensitive

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Posts:
    528
    Likes Received:
    4,235
    Trophy Points:
    13,017
    Credits:
    5,527
    Ratings:
    +4,694 / 49 / -20
    I must agree with you but the possibilities such thing deliver are way to many not to be considered.....
     
    • Hopeful Hopeful x 1
  3. HeirTrilogy

    HeirTrilogy Rebelscum

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2016
    Posts:
    85
    Likes Received:
    330
    Trophy Points:
    707
    Credits:
    895
    Ratings:
    +383 / 0 / -0
    While I have an initial reaction that is easily summed up in a meme, I've put together a few brief answers.

    I think this is a completely different way of viewing the Original Trilogy. I see the Original Trilogy as the land that all the stepping stones lead to, not stones just to connect other stones.

    I see movies as stories being told in a visual manner. So long as the CGI serves this, and doesn't detract, upgrades aren't really necessary and big budgets do not mean better movies. Other stories have been run into the ground under a similar confusion of better-CGI with better-movie. The 3rd Matrix, Transformers, etc. I don't see how a bigger budget would make the twin sun scene any more moving.

    And, you can just go the SE route to upgrade special effects if you want, though I think we see the slippery slope "just adding a little more" can be.

    I don't know if the Luke and Leia romance were necessarily mistakes, more red herrings. And the romance wasn't really serious, so I don't think this is something that would create scandal that requires erasing.

    Every subsequent movie did intro new characters, but did not make it feel like a new medley -- it intro'd people essential to the main story. I don't know if you could add new characters without losing the continuity of the originals. Already you had 3 separate stories going at any one time, jumping back and forth between your main characters. They were pretty nicely balanced.

    I should mention I am a HUGE EU fan and was, to be understated, saddened by their decanonization, so I am not putting aside this argument out of disregard for the classic characters of EU. But, part of the reason they worked is because they were given a proper introduction, back story, and time to grow as characters. Taking this time away from them and sliding them in just for face recognition joy to a select few people is not going to do them service. Disney has shown they have no issues with spin-offs, spin-sides, spin-downs, and spin-until-the-well-is-dry's, I'm sure that these characters will be intro'd in a movie format if they see any profit to be made. No need to change the OT to give them a "reason."

    They are making enough money already, I do not think that a reboot of the OT is really necessary to "bring it into the next century." They are doing just fine with their other titles. The SW answer to the ST reboot is TFA. It was so thinly guised, I don't really see how explicitly doing the OT again would achieve this in a way that TFA didn't.

    And no, I would not line up to see it over and over again.

    If you make the argument that a full remake isn't necessarily a bad thing, I simply reply that is is certainly not a good thing and offers the current SW fan no value that cannot be achieved more efficiently and effectively in another way. I am not concerned with the economical profit of the studios and producers, as much as they may want me to fund their wellbeing. "Economical profit" may be in the business's interest, not the fans'. There is a difference between offering value and a money grab. I see no way how the reboot would fall into the former rather than the latter.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. CTrent29

    CTrent29 Rebel Official

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2015
    Posts:
    1,503
    Likes Received:
    1,510
    Trophy Points:
    6,192
    Credits:
    2,523
    Ratings:
    +2,410 / 394 / -178
    Frankly, I hate the idea of a reboot. But if there are fans who seriously believe that the PT should be remade or rebooted, then the same might as well be done to the OT, which was no more or less perfect than the PT.
     
    • Hopeful Hopeful x 1
  5. AstromechRecords

    AstromechRecords Jedi General

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2015
    Posts:
    16,794
    Likes Received:
    15,180
    Trophy Points:
    149,777
    Credits:
    20,099
    Ratings:
    +26,533 / 845 / -253
    If the pt didn'nt happen then the st wouldn't have happened.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  6. 77th

    77th Force Sensitive

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Posts:
    528
    Likes Received:
    4,235
    Trophy Points:
    13,017
    Credits:
    5,527
    Ratings:
    +4,694 / 49 / -20
    I respect, and in many ways subscribe, your point of view.

    I introduced this question stating early that i'm agains't the idea of a reboot, but i also consider this could be a real possibility and we could talk about it for a while, if not just considering the Pros and the Cons (and for my surprise there are plenty of Cons).

    I believe this same question is going to appear in some Disney group discussion panel, just considering the FACTS with no strings attached:

    - Original SW is 40 Years Old, to many new viewers is something old or unseen.
    - The best SW Era is that same Empire Era, and all that cast is much older or no longer with us, hurting the chances of releasing more movies in that Era.
    - The possibilities of adding or deleting, or even introducing new characters in the base trilogy are very good.
    - Any Sw Movie in Empire Era will generate plenty of money on movie audiences and merchandising profits (i know for all of us movie fans this isn't a question at all but for the studios this might be the only question and it should considered)

    I repeat myself: i'm not foward the idea of changing a piece of history like the original SW Movies but if they went with it we might get something very interesting or just another piece of movie garbage.

    "The history repeats itself" all the great movies from that time period are getting somekind of Reboot, Mad Max anyone?, mainly because movie moguls keep milking the sacred cows and redoing all the good stuff they know people will rewatch or just because the gigantic lack of talent among today's screenwriters. But we must remember Star Wars originally was like a small indie movie built by a group of talented and entusiastic guys but still very naive in their approach to the continuity of a story, i would love to see Original Star Wars built like a full event from scratch, but in the end perhaps my favorite aspect of the original Star Wars Trilogy is their simplicity.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Hopeful Hopeful x 1
  7. Vader_the_White

    Vader_the_White Rebel General

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2015
    Posts:
    421
    Likes Received:
    769
    Trophy Points:
    3,672
    Credits:
    1,299
    Ratings:
    +1,228 / 15 / -5
    Films like The Wizard of Oz or much of the classic Disney animated films are much older, yet are still watched. The OT is among these films.
    Rogue One shows that we don't need the original actors to do films in this era. There's more happening than just the adventures of Luke, Han, Leia, etc. And occasionally, we hit a perfect replacement (Mon Mothma, for instance).
     
    • Like Like x 2
  8. 77th

    77th Force Sensitive

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Posts:
    528
    Likes Received:
    4,235
    Trophy Points:
    13,017
    Credits:
    5,527
    Ratings:
    +4,694 / 49 / -20
    "Wizard of Oz" Really?

    How many versions of Wizard of Oz we've seen in the last 10 years? In Animation there's more than a few from Disney's Sequels to Muppetts, Tom & Jerry and Euro interpretations but on Live Action we have also a few, from my head "After the Wizard", "The Wiz Live" and "The Great and Powerfull OZ".

    Let's face it, Reboot's are the standard in Hollywood and not the exception, if any movie performs well is more than certain that a new version of that movie will appear in a near future (cheking the existent movies i would say 20 to 30 years time).
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Hopeful Hopeful x 1
  9. HeirTrilogy

    HeirTrilogy Rebelscum

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2016
    Posts:
    85
    Likes Received:
    330
    Trophy Points:
    707
    Credits:
    895
    Ratings:
    +383 / 0 / -0
    My apologies if I came off antagonistic. The ball started to roll and I got on my own train :)

    I see how, yes, a movie producer can make the argument it is time to reboot the series, starting with the originals. But, I do think that TFA in some ways preserved the OT from this, because Disney is moving the franchise to focus on new stars and characters, retiring the old ones out and putting to pasture. The old characters are carefully being written out, preserving legacy but not really the focus of the new era. Like we'e seen with the EU, they seem more interested in retiring/moving on than making the previous work. I think the OT gives them the "based on a classic" that they like, but the money is in Rey and Kylo Ren, etc. They are actively marketing these characters, they may not want to split the attention. And, they haven't remade any of their classic animated movies yet, that I know of. Sure, they do spinoffs focusing on the villain, telling from another point of view, but no straightforward retelling of the story. (I'm focusing on Disney habit here, am I missing some movies?)

    I think Disney actually opted instead of redoing the OT, to go forward with the story set in movies 1-6. I don't see how going back, after establishing this new franchise, would achieve as much for them monetarily, when put side by side with, say, a movie strictly about Finn.

    Mad Max is a great, and very unique example, of a reboot working. I didn't see it. No on in my circle of friends saw it, so I am basing this off of awards. But, I don't know if Mad Max original had achieved the same mythic and cultural phenomenon status that Star Wars did. I had heard of it, it was a "classic", but I don't remember multiple organizations dedicated to movie-grade costumes based on Mad Max. Star Wars has a very high bar that few other modern movies match in terms of dedicated fans.

    I agree that, had Lucas et al had more experience, the original SW may have not had as many inconsistencies and small blips. They are relatively minor to me now, but the argument is valid the movies could be better in that regard. BUT, I highly doubt any reboot could capture the same spirit, innocence, and excitement of being introduced to an entirely new world -- really, galaxy. So, again, you could make a movie that checks off more boxes, but not one that is better. I think that's the special sauce that made the original successful; hopefully Disney thinks the same as well.

    But, when someone says Wizard of Oz, you think of Judy Garland and the 1939 movie. You have to say "new" or "so and so's version" to get someone to think otherwise. Wizard of Oz has first position in their mind, all others are secondary (also why they need different names to differentiate themselves in the customer's mind). This is the case with original movies that are very successful. Anything that comes after them will not hold the same weight as the original. It is easier to build something new and make it stick, than replace a great original. I'll be interested to see how the new Mary Poppins works out -- even that is a sequel, not a remake, though.

    I think the trend for reboots is a more recent thing, so hitting the newer movies in the 20-30 timespan you mention seems to be the case. But [successful] movies farther back than 20-30 years seem to have a more solid place in the society's standing; sequels and spin offs seem to the MO for these movies to get new treatments.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  10. Vader_the_White

    Vader_the_White Rebel General

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2015
    Posts:
    421
    Likes Received:
    769
    Trophy Points:
    3,672
    Credits:
    1,299
    Ratings:
    +1,228 / 15 / -5
    In addition to what HeirTrilogy said, there is a difference between Star Wars and The Wizard of Oz:
    If you want to make a new Star Wars film, there is a lot more room to do so. You don't have to go back and directly do A New Hope. You move on to new characters.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  11. MemphisRains

    MemphisRains Clone Commander

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Posts:
    130
    Likes Received:
    143
    Trophy Points:
    277
    Credits:
    575
    Ratings:
    +193 / 5 / -1
    Things like SW must be untouchable then it comes to remakes.
     
    • Great Post Great Post x 1
  12. AstromechRecords

    AstromechRecords Jedi General

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2015
    Posts:
    16,794
    Likes Received:
    15,180
    Trophy Points:
    149,777
    Credits:
    20,099
    Ratings:
    +26,533 / 845 / -253
    People said the same thing about Harry Potter and look what they did with the stage play ...
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  13. MemphisRains

    MemphisRains Clone Commander

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Posts:
    130
    Likes Received:
    143
    Trophy Points:
    277
    Credits:
    575
    Ratings:
    +193 / 5 / -1
    Yeah, black Hermione. But it's not a remake, I believe. It's more like sequels for Terminator dilogy.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. AstromechRecords

    AstromechRecords Jedi General

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2015
    Posts:
    16,794
    Likes Received:
    15,180
    Trophy Points:
    149,777
    Credits:
    20,099
    Ratings:
    +26,533 / 845 / -253
    But remember the terminator movies are different, too, because each movie pretty much reboots the previous one .
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. MemphisRains

    MemphisRains Clone Commander

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Posts:
    130
    Likes Received:
    143
    Trophy Points:
    277
    Credits:
    575
    Ratings:
    +193 / 5 / -1
    Thing is - remakes are good then they made by the best. And some movies are just too good for remakes. You have may try make a sequel, which may be similar to the first one, but you must bring new stuff, and you must be good. T2 works because of new ideas and innovation. Others didn't have enough of that.
     
    #55 MemphisRains, Jul 15, 2016
    Last edited: Jul 15, 2016
    • Great Post Great Post x 2
  16. Vader_the_White

    Vader_the_White Rebel General

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2015
    Posts:
    421
    Likes Received:
    769
    Trophy Points:
    3,672
    Credits:
    1,299
    Ratings:
    +1,228 / 15 / -5
    1) Not a remake, it's a sequel.
    2) It's a play, not a movie.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. AstromechRecords

    AstromechRecords Jedi General

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2015
    Posts:
    16,794
    Likes Received:
    15,180
    Trophy Points:
    149,777
    Credits:
    20,099
    Ratings:
    +26,533 / 845 / -253
    A sequel with , for example, an actor that looks nothing like the original cast, changing up the original personas (even though JK never specified ethnicities and the studios declared them from her blessings), so while having a sequel in mind it has a physical thing as a remake

    It's a play, yes .
     
    • Hopeful Hopeful x 1
  18. SKB

    SKB Force Sensitive

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2015
    Posts:
    2,493
    Likes Received:
    3,018
    Trophy Points:
    14,367
    Credits:
    6,879
    Ratings:
    +7,359 / 418 / -297
    [​IMG]
    No. Just no.
    :eek:
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  19. AstromechRecords

    AstromechRecords Jedi General

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2015
    Posts:
    16,794
    Likes Received:
    15,180
    Trophy Points:
    149,777
    Credits:
    20,099
    Ratings:
    +26,533 / 845 / -253
    It's the current Disney regime not the original ones .
     
    • Hopeful Hopeful x 1
  20. Vader_the_White

    Vader_the_White Rebel General

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2015
    Posts:
    421
    Likes Received:
    769
    Trophy Points:
    3,672
    Credits:
    1,299
    Ratings:
    +1,228 / 15 / -5
    The cast of the film doesn't matter to the play. Especially since quite often appearances in the films didn't match the books (example: in the books, Aunt Petunia and Dudley have blond hair).
    Also, how does this make it a remake?
     
    • Like Like x 1
Loading...

Share This Page