The Final Cut...

    A few weeks back it was announced that the Snyder Cut of the 2017 Justice League movie was going to be finished finally and released exclusively on HBO Max in the United States next year. For some time fans online have been clamoring to see this version of the film, believing Snyder’s original vision for the film was vastly superior to the Joss Whedon version we got in theaters.
    I went and saw the Whedon movie back when it came out in the theater. I also own it on Blu-ray. It’s an okay film. Not terrible but certainly not great either.
    Even seeing it the first time it was obvious it was a mash-up between whatever Snyder wanted to do and what Whedon cobbled together from that and his own rewrites and reshoots.
    Will the Snyder Cut be worth the wait? Maybe. Maybe not. If nothing else, at least we’ll get one man’s vision for the story instead of the mish-mash we ended up with before.
    I’ve read that Snyder had ambitious plans to set up a trilogy with an involved story about Superman’s ultimate redemption and Darkseid’s invasion of Earth. Supposedly, the big-wigs at Warner Bros got cold feet over committing to such a potentially complicated and expensive venture and pulled the plug.
    What’s true? What’s not? It’s hard to know...
    One thing that is certain though is that trying to combine these two men’s very different visions failed. A story solely by Snyder or Whedon could have been very good. As it was, we got a mediocre film out of the deal and Marvel Studios certainly didn’t feel any pressure on their Avengers franchise when put up against DC’s Justice League. Even the weakest Avengers film is still miles ahead.
    Justice League’s relative failure and its new incarnation are interesting in another way though. Even in Whedon’s film we can see the differing tones and ideas at play. One can presently only imagine what else was originally envisioned (and soon enough, we’ll be able to see it for ourselves).
    Of course, this isn’t the first time a movie has been radically edited and/or reshot. It’s been going on for decades and the process is endlessly fascinating–especially to outsiders like ourselves.
    A simple cut here or there–or excising half of the film for new footage–can radically change the story’s intent and outcome. It’s also an interesting way to learn about editing, whether one is a novice or a practiced storyteller.
    No matter the format, editing is the lifeblood of storytelling. When the story runs too long, too short, a character does or doesn’t work, the ending needs fixing, the prose needs updating, etc. Many a countless hour has been spent pouring over the story, trying to get it just right.
    Editing can be the bane of many an aspiring writer. How many epics have been sidelined because the author decided the story just wasn’t “right”? How many tales will never see the light of day because of the author’s inability to get the story finished to their own satisfaction?
    Look at film. Both Terminator 2: Judgement Day and Aliens have extended versions where something like fifteen minutes of footage has been added back to the story. In both cases, the films are considerably better with the extra content. Great films made even better with just a little bit more.
    Then, there’s movies like 2003's Daredevil. The theatrical cut of the film was a disappointment to many. The movie felt shallow and maybe even a bit sexist (Matt and Elektra’s relationship seemed nothing but physical yet contradictorly, he acted as if she was the love of his life).
    As it turns out, there was more footage and the Director’s Cut, which eventually made it out on DVD, was a considerable improvement. In it, Matt is unsatisfied with all his frivolous physical relationships with women and when Elektra happens along he finds an equal in spirit and fortitude. Also, there is a subplot about The Arranger being responsible for murdering a young woman and framing an innocent black man. The longer cut still doesn’t rank among the greatest superhero films I’ve ever seen yet it is a significant upgrade over what we initially got.
    There’s so many examples out there for re-edited movies to chose from. From major changes like Richard Donner’s Superman II and the fourth Exorcist film (Exorcist: The Beginning and Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist) to smaller changes on countless films from every genre and era.
    It’s been said copious editing was what saved the original Star Wars film. George Lucas had hours of footage and thanks to the editing team (which included his then-wife Marsha) it was cut down to a brisk and entertaining film that became one of the most popular movies of all time. Without the two editors it might very well have turned out as a horrible failure.
    Editing works best when the Editor has a good command of storytelling techniques and understands how to make the story flow properly. Too much story (be it footage or prose) can be extraneous but too little can also rob the story of texture. Also, some times writers just put odd things in the story and it’s the job of the Editor to decide whether or not that stuff is relevant to the overall point of the story–be it the plot or characterization.
    Also, everyone is different. One creator might think something is just right for a story while another might scoff at the same notion. What if Luke Skywalker had a girlfriend in the original movie? How would that have affected his tale? Would he still have left Tatooine? Maybe. Perhaps it could’ve played into the overall plot. Perhaps it could have hindered it. One really has no way of knowing one way or the other and neither option is right or wrong. We just got the story we did and it works well as it is.
    One person’s edit may seem like genius to them while the next might find it absurd. I personally think Prometheus was over-edited (some crucial information was cut from the final version of the film and I feel it hindered it. Obviously the film’s editors felt otherwise).
    Movie studios can be even worse since a lot of their decisions are made by oft-clueless executives who only think in terms of dollars. How many rely on test audiences to try and gauge the success of a film? How often does that ever work out for the best?
    At the end of the day, editing is a necessary evil in storytelling. It simply cannot function without a judgmental eye. The trick is in trying to know what’s best for the story and following one’s experience and intuition in the spirit of communicating the best tale one can.

DKA

 

 

 

 

Hey Kids! Comics!

    I grew up with comics. From the time I was about three or four I was exposed to the graphical storytelling art form. It all started off with my older sister’s DC Comics collection. She had several comics but I remember her Superman and Justice League comics especially (I think she also had some Wonder Woman issues too).
    It was too long ago and I don’t remember any specifics of the comics but I know Superman and Jimmy Olson had some adventures together. I also remember the various Green Lanterns and Flashes from the old Crisis crossovers.
    Next up was Green Lantern. I had a few issues of that at a point where Hal Jordan quit the Green Lantern Corp for a bit and John Stewart took his place (and also quickly revealed his secret identity to the world). Around the same time, I also had a few issues of ROM: Space Knight. I remember an issue of ROM where he was changed back into a human and also his girlfriend took over his partner knight’s (Starshine) body.
    I also had a few scant issues of the old Marvel Star Wars comic. It was okay but even as a kid I felt it sometimes strayed too much from what made the movies so great.




    I got more heavily into comics with G.I.JOE: A Real American Hero. I loved the toys at the time and started buying the comic at issue #50. I enjoyed the stories as well as the art. Shortly after, I also started buying Transformers as well (also toys I collected at the time). G.I.JOE was a gateway drug that got me heavier into other comics such as Captain America (during Mark Gruenwald’s long run) as well as X-Factor (Simonson run) then later comics such as the Avengers, X-Men and several others.
    I also got into Batman for a while around the time Tim Burton’s movie came out (I actually preferred the comics interpretation more). At some point I took a long break then came back years later, picking up with Batman again and a few others.
    Eventually, all the gimmicks got on my nerves and I slowly dropped away from comics entirely. I’ve gone back every so often time and again over the years but it seems like newer comics just don’t have that same spark the older ones did.
    I like old school comics best. One and done stories. Or ones that are multi-part stories that actually entertain you with a good story. Too many modern ones do nothing to entertain you or change anything. I read a six issue Justice League origin (new 52 one) where barely anything happened! For $5 an issue I expect better.
    There’s also too many events and other dumb gimmicks (remember the foil and holo covers of the 1990s? Or the trading cards?) Just tell me a good story! Why is that so hard now? Are the writers incompetent or do the companies not permit them to do so, focusing instead on immediate cash grabs instead? Either way, it’s just not the same.
    The lack of quality in the comics from the Big Two are a part of why I think the MCU movies are so popular. They’re generally more concise. One and done (while being part of a bigger story arc with the Infinity Stones. But that doesn’t usually overwhelm the individual movies). Sadly, as time goes on, I think the big over-arcing stories might eventually ruin the MCU and DCEU as well. It’s inevitable somebody somewhere will think they’re a storytelling genius and attempt some ill-advised mega story that loses the audience in the process.
    Anyway, just give me a good story and I’ll be happy.

DKA

Back in the Kitchen. Where You Came From!

   I was watching a video on Youtube earlier that was talking about Naughty Dog Studios (Uncharted video games; The Last of Us) and how they were pandering to a feminist agenda, brought on by indulging a “crazy lady” that was more concerned with pushing her “progressive” agenda then allowing the Studio to produce good games on their own merits.
    Scandalous! Completely unbelievable!
    But... is it true?
    I looked into the matter a bit and found they were talking about Anita Sarkeesian, a well known woman that lectures and leads an organization that promotes strong female and ethnic diversity in media.
    Supposedly, she’s forcing her awful feminist agenda on Naughty Dog, making them include LGBTQ characters, relegating male lead characters to background characters and so on. She even got Amy Hennig (herself a woman and well known writer/producer of the Uncharted games) fired from the Studio when she didn’t tow the progressive line.
    The video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6f6mmuh_04&t=0s) is by a movie/video game critic I follow on Youtube who goes by the nomme de plume “The Critical Drinker”. He’s not afraid to tear movies a new one and his schtick is generally entertaining. Usually, I agree with him when he calls something good or bad (he’s also a novelist apparently).
    I have noticed a strong tendency of his to decry perceived “social justice” movements in media. Kathleen Kennedy is the devil, for example, forcing her feminist evil on Star Wars and making us have a crappy character like Rey be the star of the films at the expense of the classic characters. (Although he also rightly points out that Rey is an underdeveloped “Mary Sue” character with no story arc or real personality to speak of). He’s also gone off on the new New Warriors series (a lot of people have, if we’re being honest) and this Anita Sarkeesian woman.
    His video spawned the typical comments one would expect: What’s she ever done? Why is she setting women back? She’s a fraud. Make your own female stories instead of hijacking existing ones. Blah, blah, blah...
    It occurred to me while writing this that the original video is most likely intentionally sensationalist to get hits. It’s far from the first time somebody has done that online and it won’t be the last.
    I don’t know what Ms. Sarkeesian’s ultimate goals are. Maybe she is just trying to make money decrying perceived social injustices in media. Maybe her motivations are purely altruistic. Most likely, the truth lies somewhere in between the two extremes.
    But... is she wrong?
     Certainly there have been some stories in pop culture with strong female characters–many of James Cameron’s movies come to mind. But predominantly it seems like movies are dominated by white male or white characters generally. I’m white myself and I can understand a writer/creator wanting to tell stories from their perspective.
    The world is not predominantly white though. Stories where everybody is white are not reflective of the world we live in and haven’t been, frankly, ever. According to Wikipedia white people only make up 11.5% of the world population. This didn’t happen in the last twenty years either. It’s been that way for centuries. Shouldn’t modern story telling reflect the world we live in?
    You can tell a story where a damsel is in distress. There’s nothing wrong with that. The problem, I think, is popular culture relied far too heavily on it at one time and there’s a perception that’s still the case. Personally, I find strong female characters to be far more interesting from a story telling perspective.
    There is a tendency among some to take it too far though. For a while in the nineties it seemed like every time a male writer wanted to tell a story about a strong female character she ended up savagely hating men and only sought recourse in the arms of another woman. (A lot of pulp comics from smaller publishers seemed to relish this sort of thing). A strong female character doesn’t have to be a militant lesbian and I think people who only see things that way are very poor story tellers/idiots.
    If you want a character to be gay that’s fine. But use it properly. Don’t use it in some bizarre gimmicky way. Find the truth in that character’s soul and explore it properly. Anything less is insulting to everybody frankly.
    Why is your female a strong female character? What circumstances made her that way? How does she see the world? If she’s a lesbian, what’s her perspective on the world?
    I’ve tried to tell stories with strong women in them (although I prefer to write pulp-style stories and I’m not certain it always comes through as well as intended). Strong women are far more interesting and believable then ones who are helpless eye candy.
    We need more female protagonists and strong female characters in storytelling in general. How they are “strong”, of course, should depend on the story needs. She doesn’t always need to be a kick-ass warrior in the traditional sense. It can be a woman who meets life head-on, a strong mother figure, etc.
    We also need more representation of so-called minorities. If you’re telling a story about a man, why does he necessarily have to be white? Is it critical to the story you’re telling?
    Which is not to say that I agree with the idea of re-casting established characters as being a different color/gender. I don’t have a problem with Miles Morales as he’s his own character–similar but not identical to Peter Parker. I don’t see why they re-did Matt Trakker as a black man in IDW’s M.A.S.K nor did I really like redoing Nick Fury in the comics as a previously unknown son of African heritage who takes up the name.
    But Static, Black Lightning and Kamala Khan are their own characters. Why not try to introduce more characters into mainstream comics, television or movies that way? If they’re interesting enough they will eventually catch on. Stop rewriting history and make some instead.
    We definitely need more women, minorities and differing viewpoints in storytelling. But we need them to be well thought out and at least attempting originality. Don’t shoehorn it in there to win points with somebody. Be genuine in your desire to tell new stories with people from other walks of life.
    In the end, everyone matters, no matter who they are or what path they may walk...

DKA

The Mysteries of Life...

    The Internet has been a boon for society in many ways. We can get instant news, instant information, buy products and services online. We can post our own projects–be they a blog, story, video or whatever else.
    But there’s a downside too.
    Once upon a time, we didn’t know (or think we know) everything about a given topic. There was speculation and mystery about some topics. What did someone mean with their artwork? The idea behind a movie or TV show when it wasn’t hit-you-over-the-head obvious? What was a song about?
    Mystery is essential in art. Be it a literal mystery or just an aspect of something bigger.
    Consider the movie Alien. What was the Space Jockey? Where did it and its ship come from? It was a really cool mystery until Prometheus came along and ruined the surprise for us (I loved the idea of the movie but ultimately the payoff was a waste of time). What about V'Ger's mysterious machine planet benefactors in Star Trek: The Motion Picture? Wolverine's origins (before they were explained into the ground by various writers).
    In Alien's case, the Space Jockey's origins were ultimately irrelevant. They exist as a plot point to move the story along. Still, it was fun to speculate on what might have been.
    I also think of things like action figures from the 80s. Often, the packaging stories/profiles told a different story of the character or back story then stuff like the comics or cartoons did. In the toys, Tarantulas (Beast Wars) was a ninja. In the cartoon, he was a mad scientist. He-Man’s mini-comics often told vastly different (and sometimes contradictory) stories of the characters adventures.
    Classically speaking, why is the Mona Lisa smiling? Is it just that she was in a pleasant mood as her portrait was being painted? Or perhaps she was smiling about some secret only she was privy to? Who knows. But it’s fun to speculate all the same.
    I think some of that mystery has been lost in modern mass media. Sometimes it feels like they're not even trying anymore. Compare something like the Rise of Skywalker with, say, Predator. The latter has plenty of mystery. The former, not so much.
    Mystery has eternal appeal to the consumer of art. It needs to be brought back to the forefront of popular media (and media in general, really).
    This also coincides with a need for new stories and concepts. How many times can you reboot Star Trek and keep it fresh? Yes, it's great to explore a story universe but eventually we learn it thoroughly and need something new. Even just taking familiar concepts and putting them in a new context can help immensely.
    Again, Corporate America is lazy. Trying to sell its varied audiences on the familiar rather then exploring new things. Familiar is a safe bet. Familiar is profitable.
    But, in the long run, familiar is detrimental to mystery. People inevitably get sick of the same old thing and seek new experiences.
    What can be done? Nothing when it comes to mainstream media. We can vote with our dollars and hope that one day somebody in charge sees the error of their ways.
    In the meantime, though, we can check out smaller authors and artists and try to seek out people who remember what the mystery is all about, devoid of needing to turn a giant profit for their corporation at all cost.
    The magic of mystery is still out there. We need only seek it out...

DKA  

On Writing...

When you’re writing fiction it’s important to keep a few things in mind as you traverse the landscape of your imagination.
    Simple story ideas are better then needlessly complicated ones. Too many people lose track of this fact. We see multi-part stories that go many places or maybe even a singular story that spirals out of control with the writer(s) thinking that “more is better”. Take “The Rise of Skywalker” as an example of this folly. I’ve also noticed a lot of modern television stories tell multiple story arcs but often lose sight of the overall point of the story while trying to flesh things out. Why does “Star Wars: A New Hope” or “The Matrix” work? They tell a simple story. “Transformers: The Last Knight” is a disaster by comparison, with seeming to mesh two different plots together poorly.
    This leads me to a related point:
    Know what story it is you want to tell. Whatever the point/theme/etc. is, know ahead of time where you want to end up or the story will probably be a mess. Again, the Star Wars sequel trilogy (Force Awakens/Last Jedi/Rise of Skywalker) had no idea where it was going or what they were doing with it. By contrast, the prequel trilogy, while far from perfect, knew where it wanted to go (at least in broad strokes anyway).
    Every story needs a point! Something needs to change or come of its events. I'm bad at this sometimes too. I’ve also done some serial storytelling in the past where this is a harder thing to accomplish. But at least strive for it in your storytelling. If nothing in your story matters or changes anything, who cares?
    It has to make sense! When it comes to TV/movies often times we get stuff that happens for no logical reason. Convenience can be used at times in stories but never really on it as a crutch. If a character acts one way having them act totally contrary makes no sense (even if it might help the writer get somewhere they need to be in the story). This is also true of concepts in general in storytelling (again, this should be obvious but somehow it seems to escape people time and again).
    "Show, don't tell" isn't always true. Novice writers are told this again and again but there are varying degrees. Showing you everything with no character feedback or description is bland and boring. The reader isn’t really engaged if they have to do all the work. On the other hand, spoon-feeding them every single point you’re trying to communicate is bad too. A writer learns after a while to try and find a balance. Each person is different and has their own preferences as to what is too little or too much and there’s not really a right or wrong answer.
    There are no original ideas. It’s sad but true. You can’t reinvent the wheel. Sorry. But as one writer I enjoy is fond of saying, “it’s not the idea but what you do with it that counts”. You can take what’s gone before and improve on it, mash it up with other ideas and story angles people haven’t tackled yet. A good story is timeless. Something the reader can identify with. A good character is one we can love. Or hate. The ideas are limited but the possibilities are infinite.
    There’s almost certainly some other rules I’ve overlooked in this entry. But it’s important to realize that there are rules. You can set out to subvert them. In fact, you should. But you need to understand what they are before you set out to break them. Don’t just depend on TV or movies for your understanding of storytelling. Read a book. Read a bunch. Get out there and see how other people do it and try to decide what works best for your own style. Every new story is somebody building on what’s gone before. Try and seek out the best of the bunch and then try to improve upon them.
    One last thing: Try and have fun, no matter what your subject matter. If you don’t enjoy the process, why bother doing it in the first place?


DKA

Some thoughts on the Rise of Skywalker and the future of Star Wars...

**Warning: Spoilers ahead!!!**


  So The Rise of Skywalker has come and gone. I was there opening night, drinking in all the fan costumes and excitement for the “final” movie in the Skywalker saga ("final" = we’ll make many, many more Star Wars movies. This is just marketing b.s.)
    RoS had a lot of things to accomplish after The Last Jedi. Love it or hate it, TLJ really upended the story Abrams tried to start in The Force Awakens. It effectively ended it early, forcing Abrams to figure out some new story to close out this new trilogy.
    For the most part, RoS accomplished what it needed to. It was an okay ending to the trilogy. A lot of stuff happened and it made enough sense and worked well enough to get the job done.
    Was it a great film? No. Do I have any idea why this sequel trilogy is even part of the "Skywalker Saga"? Not really. Hastily forming a connection between Rey and the Skywalkers in the very end of the movie is not a great justification for it. Really, it feels like an afterthought. An “oh yeah, I guess we have to make some sense of it”. The movie is “The Rise of Skywalker” and I guess we can say that’s Rey then.
    Say what you will about the Prequel Trilogy (The Phantom Menace/Attack of the Clones/Revenge of the Sith) at least there was an over-arcing story to it all. Anakin is a kid; he rises; he falls. I have no idea what the point of this new trilogy was (other then to make money on merchandising anyway).
    We were introduced to Rey, a character with no real arc and not much of a personality either. Finn and the other characters also have little of real consequence to do throughout the story as well. There are legacy characters present as well but none of them do much really either. Han dies in the first one, Luke acts totally out of character then dies when he uses the force too hard (??) in the second one. Of course, Leia had to die in the third one since her actor died in real life. They might as well not have even appeared in this story at all–it would’ve cleared up a little bit of space for actual storytelling instead of this waste of time.
    We have some new “Force Teleport/mind connection power” thing in RoS. It makes little sense and now the characters are essentially all-powerful (except when the plot decides they’re not). Also, there’s now “Force Heal” (which bothers me a little bit less. It’s also been shown in The Mandalorian and I believe goes back to some earlier video games. It’s at least a little bit better defined as an ability).
    I didn’t like Rose Tyco in TLJ. They had a chance to redeem her character here but chose not to even bother trying. Supposedly the character had more scenes but they got cut for time. Either way, it feels like they didn’t like the character and just side-lined her as much as possible. After all she did in the last movie, this felt like a weird choice and they still seemed to have time to introduce plenty of new characters along the way...
    We got to see more of the Knights of Ren in this one but they ultimately don't do anything or even add to the plot in any way. They show up and then die late in the film... Also, General Hux is mostly wasted here as well.
    And, how did so much of the second Death Star survive (when it was clearly blown to smithereens in ROTJ)? Also, what is Palpatine in this movie and how did he survive? His body seems like a zombie/half-alive clone/something here but it’s never clearly articulated as to what his status is. He’s alive but still needs Rey to transfer his consciousness into and/or re-animate him properly. Huh??
    Who are Palpatine’s legions of followers? Acolytes? Well-wishers?? The Sith Code says they can’t be fellow Sith, so what then? Where did he get all those new Star Destroyers with planet destroying guns and the thousands of crew to man them all?
    Also, we went from having to build a moon-sized base that can destroy a planet to a planet that can shoot over Hyperspace to anywhere in the Galaxy apparently to just having a fleet of Star Destroyers with super cannons. I can accept that technology can advance over time (like in real life) but really?? The Empire/First Order/whatever has gotten technology that can pretty much accomplish anything at all that the writers want to do now. There’s no limitations at all. Shouldn’t they literally be unstoppable?
    Back in 2015 I was concerned when Lucasfilm announced they were going to do one new Star Wars movie a year. Turns out, I was right to be worried. There was no thought put into this trilogy (at least on an artistic level, anyway). It feels like the cash grab it is (which is not to say that Lucasfilm under George Lucas didn’t try to make money off it’s Intellectual Property but there was at least some attempt at giving fans some meat story-wise. People may not have loved the Prequels necessarily but they got us the excellent Clone Wars animated series and other stories inspired by them in comic and novel form–some of which are non-canonical now, but I digress).
    Of the new Disney era, all we’ve gotten for solid films in Rogue One (there are places even it could’ve been better but I haven’t seen many complaints about it overall). Rebels and now, The Mandalorian, give us some hope for a better tomorrow as well. But if LFL/Disney wants Star Wars to have a theatrical future, they really need to flesh out their story concepts better instead of throwing everything but the kitchen sink at the wall and seeing what sticks. Also, get some better talent to write/direct. JJ Abrams, Rian Johnson and others of their kind are not the right fit for this area.
    Blockbuster film or not, we need stories that are well told and paced better then the product we’ve been getting. There needs to be a firm storyline through any movie, a logical setup and believable stakes. Special effects extravaganzas are great but they’re like junk food. Satisfying in the short-term but ultimately forgettable.
    As for me, I’m no longer bothering to see SW films multiple times at the theater. Once is good enough for me. Also, I have no problem disregarding this whole Sequel Trilogy from my personal canon. It’s forgettable and adds nothing new.
    I have spoken!

This is a rebellion, isn't it? I rebel.

Rogue One thoughts...

(WARNING! SPOILERS!!!)



I’ve seen Rogue One twice now (once in 2D and the second time in IMAX 3D). It’s a very good, if unconventional, Star Wars movie. There’s no title scroll, it’s more dark in tone and everyone dies in the end but the story is fairly good overall.
    I like Jyn Erso very much. Felicity Jones brings both sympathy and hope to the character (I think it’s her big sad eyes that help sell the character. When I gaze into them I just want to kiss her on the head and give her a puppy!)
    I do think the character could’ve had a bit more personality in the present time. First, she’s a sweet little girl then a grown woman who’s quiet, full of abandonment issues and...that’s about it. The trailers had her with an attitude–she’s defiant ("I rebel") and a bit of criminal. More of a female Han Solo type but, for whatever reason, that didn’t make it into the final cut of the movie and I find that unfortunate. She’s not a terrible character by any means but she could’ve used a bit more color in some fashion to help distinguish her better. (Conversely, at least we get some kind of back story for her–unlike Rey, who is still a mystery after the end of her first film).
    I also think that maybe there was a bit more back story between Jyn and Saw. It would’ve helped flesh out her character a little more. Also, Saw’s “what will you become” speech must have been somewhere in there so it make sense we may be lacking a flashback somewhere early on in the final cut. His character is just barely in this film, after all is said and done.
    Also, where does Bodhi’s use of “Rogue. Rogue One” come from? Did Jyn or someone originally say something about being a rogue? There’s no set-up for it in the final film. It seems like there should be.
    Why does all the promotional material call Jyn “Sergeant” when she never seems to get any kind of rank given to her in the movie? Again, could we be missing something that established that originally? Or was in creative license on someone's part?
    The scene where Jyn and Cassian are scouting out Jedha City from a distance is also either from early in the shoot--or much later on. Jyn looks slightly different here and it's obvious the scene was not filmed at the same time as most of the other stuff was.
    I loved the inclusion of Chopper (from Rebels) in the background in one scene on Yavin IV. We even hear his distinctive chirping amidst the noise in the background as Mon Mothma and Bail Organa are speaking. Also, the inclusion of the Ghost in the background in one shot as well as the Hammerhead cruiser’s role in saving the day.
    My biggest disappointment in this movie is how everyone dies. Not that I can’t stand a dark ending but Jyn’s whole life is a shit sandwich. After finally believing in something and pursuing it she ends up essentially being further penalized for it. It’s sad! Also, I feel like everyone dying was the most predictable route to go–everyone expected the characters would all die–and they do! I would’ve preferred they zigged instead of zagged and at least had tried to have Jyn and Cassian survive.
    The callbacks to the older films are great but I think throwing Doctor Evizan and Ponda Babba in there might’ve been a bit much. They really don't matter at the end of the day and this almost makes them seem more important then they actually are. I also don't think we really needed to see Leia's cgi face either. A shot of her from behind was sufficient to establish her presence.
    Also, if the Tantive IV goes into hyperspace at the end of the film, how does Vader’s Star Destroyer ever find it before A New Hope begins? We know from Empire that once ships get into hyperspace they’re safe from pursuit. So... how's that supposed to work?
    One thing I’ve noticed about both The Force Awakens and Rogue One is that they pay a lot of tribute to what has gone before. That’s fine and all, but eventually Lucasfilm/Disney is going to need to break away from homaging the material and strike out in a new direction. Nostalgia can only sustain a concept for so long... we need new reasons to care or it eventually becomes redundant. A Han Solo film or Boba Fett film or whatever is fine short term but come up with new ideas already!

May The Force Be With You!

WARNING! SPOILERS AHEAD!!!

 

    It’s December 2015 and Star Wars: The Force Awakens is out. As of this writing, I’ve seen it twice. I know, I said I wasn’t all that excited about it and that was true--initially, at least. But something happened a few months back and I allowed myself to get caught up in all the hype. I collected a lot of action figures, a couple of posters, some Christmas ornaments, followed the Marvel comic (which is pretty good, incidentally), the soundtrack and even got some of the collectible cups (this time from Subway).
    I figured, why not? Let’s give it 110% one final time. I do still hold by my stance that I’m not going to go all-out and support every single SW release every single year. I’m not made of money, for one thing, and I just don’t have the energy to do this all the time. In taking SW full-swing, Disney has canceled out the special-ness factor of getting a new film every few years and opted for the full-on money machine that Marvel has become (not that I blame them exactly, but I don’t feel the need to support it constantly either. I have to right be selective in the face of such sheer volume).
    So, you might wonder, what did I think of the whole production?


The Jedi, The Dark Side and Whatever Lies In-between...

    The story was pretty good overall. The plot and dialogue felt more natural then George Lucas’ prequel films (although that was likely a given after that bad response to them. Lucasfilm couldn’t really afford to screw this one up and I’m happy to say they didn’t). There was also a lot of humor and it didn’t feel forced.
    I was surprised and impressed Han Solo got so much screen time in this one. I’d thought the original cast members would just show up for extended cameos, much the way Leonard Nimoy’s Spock did in Abrams’ previous Star Trek film efforts. I also liked that Chewbacca got treated as a character too and not just a glorified set piece. Leia didn’t really do all that much, neither did Artoo. Luke’s presence was non-existent (I’m hoping Episode VIII will remedy this).
    The new characters, Rey, Finn and Poe are instantly likeable and seem to fit well with this universe. I’m glad Poe survived his initial “death” (apparently they had originally intended to leave him dead but changed their minds). I’m hoping we’ll get to see more of him next time around.
    Rey, it turns out, is strong in the Force and takes on Kylo Ren at the film’s climax. I instantly liked her character. She’s a bit of techno-wiz, but it felt plausible in the context of the story–she’s a scavenger and tinkerer by necessity.
    Finn was a bit of an enigma by comparison. We know he has a heart and wants to do the right thing but I was left wondering if he is also Force sensitive. How did he shrug off his Stormtrooper conditioning otherwise? For that matter, how was nearly instantly good with the TIE and Falcon’s weapons systems? He even wields a Lightsaber, how ever briefly. I really do hope this is explored in the next film... Rey could return a Jedi (or near-Jedi) and Finn could find temptation to turn to the Dark Side as he begins his own journey.
   And then we have this film’s big bad: Kylo Ren. He looks like a wannabe Darth Vader (but in a good way) and as the story moves along we learn he is the son of Han and Leia, gone evil. It intimated he may have had some Daddy issues (he tells Rey she wouldn’t have like Han if he’d been her actual father when he senses she sees him as a bit of a surrogate one). He has an arc in the film as well and he’s interesting enough that we wouldn’t mind seeing a bit more of him. At the climax, I wanted to see him die but was ultimately glad he didn’t (Lucas made that mistake when he introduced Darth Maul then killed him off in the same film). He can pay for his crimes (or redeem himself) in the third part. For variety, I would like to seem him remain irredeemable and get destroyed (we don’t need an exact retread of Vader). I would also like to see more of his back story get filled-in over the next two instalments so that we might understand him better.        
    His master is Supreme Leader Snoke, a cgi villain with a flair for the dramatic. There are rumors online he might be Darth Plagueis reborn. I honestly don’t know one way or the other (Palpatine intimated he’d killed him). I do know that, so far at least, Palpatine was a more compelling antagonist. Ian McDiarmid did an amazing job of the character in his four turns at it and he is a very hard act to follow.
    John Williams is back to do the music and he mostly dispenses with the older themes in favor of all-new ones. There doesn’t seem to be quite as many memorable themes in this film but Rey gets one (and it’s good. A mixture of curiosity and yearning). The rest of the score is fast paced and fairly solid.
    I don’t have a lot negative to say about the film. My biggest complaint is the death of Han Solo and even there, I’m of two minds. Everyone loves Han and nobody wanted to see their hero die. On the other hand, it served the story well and felt meaningful (better then if he’d died getting blown up while taking out the second Death Star, as was originally planned way back when). Also, if Harrison Ford doesn’t want to keep coming back as the character ad nauseam, it made sense to give him a proper send-off rather then trying to come up with excuses for why he’s not there in future episodes. (At least his death meant something in this story–rather then being totally pointless sensationalism like Captain Kirk’s death in Generations).
    Another major complaint is yet another Super weapon. Sigh. It was bad enough the old EU did this crap all the time. Now an official film does it too. Still, I can forgive it if they don’t do again in future instalments. It really pushes credibility to say the bad guys have endless time and resources to keep building massive doomsday weapons (it's also lazy writing).
    The film also follows A New Hope’s plot points almost perfectly (which is a bit annoying) and even calls back stuff during the movie–the training sphere Luke used on the Falcon, the 3D Chess set, the Trash Compactor references, Starkiller Base and the good guys sneaking around it... And the bad guys only seem to employ one type of TIE Fighter (promotional material says it’s actually two but on film it might as well be one) while the Resistance only seems to have X-Wings (which seemed odd. But it occurs to me this is probably also a call back to the original film). I hope future parts stop pushing the nostalgia in-film so hard (I don't want to see the exact same movie over and over!)
    This film also differs from the previous movies in that it has no “wipes” (old school-y transitioning between scenes). This was a Lucas thing and it may seem dated, but that was sort of the point: a call-back to pulp space opera serials of the 40s, like Flash Gordon and Buck Rogers. For whatever reason, JJ Abrams chose not to use these in his film.
    Also, the opening fanfare is gone. Granted, the music belonged to 20th Century Fox (the older films distributor) but this movie needed something there. New triumphant “light” music–or even dramatic “dark” drumming. Just something to give people that one final “this is a Star Wars film! Get ready!” sentiment that all the previous films had. In its place, we have a silent “Lucasfilm Ltd.” logo and it just isn’t the same.
    I also feel like this movie lacked the...I dunno, whimsy, of the previous films. It was a bit darker in tone and it felt like there wasn’t really a spirit of “fun”. The sense of going on a grand adventure with the characters and some scenes of just pure joy. We all love Empire, of course, but even a dark film like Revenge of the Sith had its moments of goofiness. I'm not saying we need all-out Jar Jar Binks here but someone needs to remember that these are supposed to be kids films too.
    But I admit most of this is nitpicking what is generally a pretty solid film and a welcome addition to the franchise.
    For Episode VIII, I’d like to see Rey return from Luke some time later, a full-on Jedi. Finn waking up can either be her catalyst to return–or perhaps he’s already been awake and she’s back for some other reason. I’d like it if he was also Force sensitive and in his learning in this film, he is heavily tempted by the Dark Side (but ultimately overcomes it due to his good heart). I also want to see Luke do much more in this film and not get killed off (that would be overdoing it, imo). I want more of Poe and Kylo Ren, as well more explanation for just what made him turn evil and why Luke left. I would also like to learn just who Snoke is, where he came from and why he seems to be in-tune with the Dark Side. They also need to figure out what Rey and Finn’s relationship is. This film left things intentionally vague. Are they just friends or is there something romantic under it all? If so, that might be a good jumping off point for further drama...  And I wouldn’t mind seeing more of Captain Phasma too–she seemed to have hardly anything to do in this last film.
    Go see this film, if you haven’t already. If you have, go see it again! :)
   
DKA

The Never Ending Battle...

    I’ve been a sci-fi/fantasy geek since I was really little and first saw a little indie film called “Star Wars”. For me, Star Wars was always my first love. There was always sci-fi shows–Battlestar Galactica, Buck Rogers, Star Trek, The Black Hole, etc, etc. and then there was Star Wars. It was simply the gold standard in my mind. There was Star Wars and all other things.
    My first exposure to Star Wars was when I was three years old. My parents and I went to the now-defunct Zellers store at Kingsway and I got a C3P0 toy. I also remember seeing lots of promotional material for Star Wars–catalogues, collector cards that came with gum, posters, picture books, records with books, etc. I also remember going to the theater and seeing a trailer for something called The Empire Strikes Back and having my mind blown.
    I’m pretty sure I saw ESB first in the theater and later on, seeing ANH on TV. In those days, VCRs were scant. If you wanted to see a movie again, you had to wait and hope it played on TV or it got re-released in theaters (Back in the day, Star Wars and its sequels got re-released a lot). VCRs were for rich, progressive people (those first units were damn expensive. Also, my parents were cheap and backward when it came to new technological marvels–but that’s a story for another time).
    By the time Return of the Jedi came around, my memory was more developed and I can still remember what an awesome time it was (I was seven, btw). Luke had a cool new green light saber. I also remember all the colors–red guards for the Emperor; green rebel commandoes, the black and grey sterile look of the Death Star II... I recall the looong line outside Londonderry Famous Players theater as my mom and I awaited for the movie. I remember going to West Edmonton Mall and seeing it again later (I used the excuse that my sisters hadn’t seen it yet as justification. That same trip, I bought a copy of one of the issues of the ROTJ mini-series from Marvel Comics and recall seeing another kid and his father as they’d just purchased one of those cool miniature die-cast Star Wars toy sets that existed at the time. They were sitting on a bench fiddling with it as my mom and I furiously tried to find our way back to the theater and the rest of the family in the behemoth mall).
    About a year later, in 1984, Star Wars was over and I discovered something else called Star Trek. I’d always been aware of its existence, of course, but never gotten into it until then. It also blew my mind (what can I say? I was a kid! Everything’s exciting at that age). Of course, Star Wars was still the ultimate gold standard but Star Trek rocked too (and, truth be told, was better constructed overall).
    I was always a toy collector (in the kiddie sense. I’d buy them, open them, play with them, lose parts and/or have toys break or get lost). I collected everything. Star Wars, the scant few Star Trek toys I could ever find. Masters of the Universe. Go-Bots. G.I.JOE. Transformers. Etc, etc.
    This also lead me into comics. I started with scant issues of this or that and eventually went full-on collector with G.I.JOE, Transformers and myriad other comics–Avengers, X-Men, X-Factor, Captain America, Spider-Man...I sampled much of the output of the time and mostly enjoyed it.
    As you grow older, tastes change. So do writers, artists and the like on comics, TV shows, etc. You’re supposed to grow up, discover the opposite sex, get a job, move out and so on. The toys, comics, etc. are supposed to be put behind you as become an adult and become respectable.
    Of course, many of us still love this junk anyway. And that’s okay. There’s no law against it and, really, some of us have the spare time and want to keep up with it. Everyone needs a hobby right?
    Sometimes, though, I wish some of these money making franchises would just end, like chapters in everyone’s lives. Star Wars ended in 1983 with ROTJ. After that, we had the Ewoks and Droids cartoons. Then nothing for about five years....finally, Tim Zahn’s Thrawn trilogy hit stores shelves, followed by eight million books and comics of varying quality. Several new movies and TV shows and way, way more toys. As I write this, Star Wars Rebels is about to debut on TV and Episode 7 is coming out next year...
    Star Trek had a Next Generation then Deep Space Nine, Voyager, Enterprise.... TNG movies, a reboot with a new Kirk and crew and a sequel to that... also, a bazillion books and comics too.
    Everything old is new again. Battlestar Galactica came back re-imagined. Transformers and G.I.JOE never really went away... those Marvel and DC comics? Still grinding them out. Some are awesome while many are also terrible
    For me, new Star Trek just isn’t the same as the classic series. It’s still characters with the same names but they just don’t do it for me anymore. I’ve actually reached a point where I’m burned out on Star Wars. I really don’t think I care about the new trilogy... it can’t possibly match people’s expectations any more then the prequel trilogy could (it will likely be better but can anything match the memory of the first trilogy in people’s minds?)
    Marvel and DC have restarted, retconned, killed and resurrected, and everything in-between so much that none of the characters are the ones I grew up with. Fundamentally, they’re the same archetypes, of course, but the history and characters are gone. The people who worked so hard to maintain it are long gone. Retired, fired, dead... in their place are new blood who don’t always understand just what it is they have in their charge.
    So, you say, we should just end it all because one blogger is sick and tired of what’s out there. Abandon years of creativity and scorch the earth? Yes and no.
    I’m not opposed to new concepts, new characters and new stories. Back in the day, that’s what kept my personal odyssey going after all. After Star Wars, I moved onto Star Trek. Later on, Babylon 5... He-Man beget G.I.JOE which beget Transformers and so on. After Marvel/DC, I discovered Darkhorse and Image... The Avengers gave way to Watchmen and Miracleman (which is old but I actually only discovered recently).
    Sometimes, though, I wish we could truly retire some of the tried and tested things. Star Wars only exists now to make money for Disney. They even said they intend to release a new film every year! Paramount keeps churning out Star Trek movie after movie... Marvel’s going full steam on their superhero movies while DC tries to play catch-up. (There’s nothing inherently bad about Marvel’s movies, at the least, but how many super powered escapist films do we need per year before the general public gets burned out?)
    I wish these corporate money machines would risk more on new properties and concepts. We don’t need to reinvent the wheel every time out but it would be nice to let some stuff die–or at least rest a while (absence makes the heart grow fonder, after all) instead of constantly going back to the well for more. Of course, lately every time Disney does risk money on something we get a flop like John Carter or a project that doesn’t perform as well as expected, like Tron Legacy (okay, that was a sequel but at least it hadn’t been beaten into the ground in the intervening years).
    In the end, though, we’re powerless to stop the cycle. Only when people start voting en masse with their wallets will things truly change. Until then, each and every fan must be choosey about what they love and will accept–and what they will not. If you love a comic/book/show/movie/toy, support it if it’s good (and you want to, of course). But don’t just accept everything with a familiar brand just because... if you do, the people making it will just churn any old crap to satisfy their quota and the whole will suffer. Nobody needs that...

DKA

The Unending, Unerring War for the Stars...

    It’s a commonly accepted fact among most geeks that the Star Wars prequel trilogy was not very good. Generally, the common response is one of hate or disgust whenever the films are brought up. After many years and much deliberation, I’ve been forced to agree.
    I wanted to have liked these movies so much. I really did. I tried for a long time to justify Lucas motives in making them the way he did. In the end, I just had to accept that they weren’t well made. (I’m not going to make any statements about how he’s destroyed my childhood or ruined Star Wars forever, etc. I’ll leave such judgements up to the more hyperbole-prone fans).
    Part of the problem lies with the methods George Lucas used to make the newer films. He chose, for better or worse, to do things in an assembly-line style. This is great from a practical standpoint. You line up your various targets in a row and then take them down in succession. Lucas took each of the varied tasks and set them up in a corporate sort of structure–this department does this and that one does that, etc.
    One need only look at the films to see the truth of the matter. The wardrobe, art department, visual effects, practical effects, music and so on are well executed. Even the advertising department did a wonderful job of getting people, time and again, to come in and see films that continued a story they had loudly and publicly decried on the internet.
    Where this system failed miserably, however, was that Lucas did the story himself and, after however many drafts, decided what he had was good. This deviates from the mess that was the making of A New Hope, where many people worked on tweaking and outright re-writing the script until we arrived at we saw on screen. It’s been said repeatedly that Lucas needed an Editor or at least others’ input for the prequel trilogy. Sadly, in his confidence that he had the right set-up to make the films he certainly overestimated his own ability to pull off a satisfying story. And what is any film, no matter how efficiently its executed, without a good story first and foremost?

What They Did Right...

   Most articles I’ve seen quickly jump to “what’s wrong with the films”. There are certainly many problems but there are also a few things they managed to get right.
    As seen on the various documentaries included with the DVDs/Blu-rays, Lucas ran a very impressive operation when he filmed the three films. Each time, he was efficient and organized when he filmed these movies. He knew exactly what he wanted, how he wanted it and how to get there. It seems like waste was kept to a minimum.
    The special effects are top notch, by and large. Lucas depended heavily on CGI instead of practical effects in these films. Most of it still holds up years later and looks very impressive even on a home screen. Additionally, the props and wardrobes are well done and very realistic looking when you watch the movies.
    The music is also excellent. Especially in The Phantom Menace, it’s clear John Williams brought his “A” game to his efforts. New compositions, such as Duel of the Fates, the Trade Federation “invasion” music, the Tatooine street music and many others demonstrate this amply. Even Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith have their moments, although they don’t feel quite as creative overall when compared to the first four films (I’ve heard it said that Lucas wanted Williams to make places where he could just insert pre-recorded themes into the later films. I’m not certain if this is true or not but it does seem a logical option when one listens to the soundtracks as performed).
    As previously mentioned, the advertising efforts were also excellent. The trailer for Phantom Menace made me want to rush out and see it. I don’t recall Attack of the Clones trailer as much but the Revenge of the Sith teaser was excellent. Obviously the commercials (and efforts) made people desire to go out and see the films time and again.

BZZT! WRONG!

    Of course the huge failure of the prequel trilogy is its awful storytelling. I’ve seen it mentioned that The Phantom Menace is structured horribly, without really having a main protagonist (one of the best commentaries on the matter that I’ve seen is the Redletter Media reviews, HERE). We really don’t know who to cheer for in TPM and after all is said and done, wonder why Qui Gon Jin is even in the story to begin with. Or why the characters make half of the choices that they do.
    Attack of the Clones is interesting but right away I knew it was a terrible movie. I was in a daze after TPM but AOTC was bad right off the bat. Once again, we have things happening that are either irrelevant or poorly executed so that we can get to the special effects and action. Perhaps one of the story’s most critical flaws is the romance between Anakin Skywalker and Padme (side note: Why was she Queen Amidala in the first movie and then Padme Naberrie in the second? No one even tried to reconcile the name differences for the character. I mean, yes, she has a double in the first film so the dual identity sort of makes sense. But how does “Amidala” relate to Padme or her time as Queen? I could never figure that one out). The romance storyline is largely given a backseat compared against Obi-wan’s mystery plot and is never convincingly done. We know Padme likes Anakin on some level but why does she suddenly decide to fall in love and marry him? He goofs off around her, whines a lot and then his mommy dies so he goes and kills a bunch of Sandpeople. In the right hands, this could’ve made sense. As it is, it’s a mess and unconvincing). Two cut scenes from the movie where we meet Padme’s family and they discuss Anakin a little behind his back help but they could’ve gone further still.
    On a minor note, the title is also terrible.... apparently Lucas was going for some kind of fifties sci-fi movie homage but it fails miserably and seems horribly out of place. The Phantom Menace and Revenge of the Sith titles I have no qualms with.
    Revenge of the Sith has its moments, but there aren’t enough of them and it’s still hampered by some bizarre story choices (wasting too much time on the Separatist ship, for example, and not being convincing enough in why Anakin turns to evil when all he really wants is to save his wife. Also, having most of the critical “Clone Wars” story happen off-camera between films).
    It’s clear Lucas didn’t plot out the whole story ahead of time, instead having broad story “beats” to achieve in each segment (Padme meets Anakin. Check. Obi-wan trains Anakin. Check. Anakin turns evil. Check. And so on...) If he’d taken the time to look at the big picture (beyond his bank account total) he could’ve figured out what he needed to do and set it up over the course of all three films instead of the willy-nilly nature of the story we got.
    Who knows? Maybe George was so busy running his empire that he didn’t have the time or creativity to devote to making a new story right. In that case, he really should’ve gotten some writers that he trusted and let them go to town on it instead.

A New Vision...

    Lucas’ broad strokes were fine, he just didn’t execute them right. Looking at what he had, he should’ve axed the whole kid Anakin thing and made him a teenager to start with. Hire one actor to play the character (someone who could act and could pull off a believable Anakin, whether he’s mellow, a hothead or whatever). Have him be believable, want to do right and end up giving into the temptations of the dark side. For my two cents, make him a Han Solo-like character...after all, the audience should like him so they can cheer for him instead thinking he’s a whiny, obnoxious twerp like the Anakin we got.
    Also, drop the whole religious-sounding thing where the Jedi abstain from relationships. It was stupid and really didn’t serve the story all that well. They were Jedi Knights, not Jedi Priests after all.
    Decide what you want to do with Padme–is she a queen, a politician, something else all together and stick with it. She should be strong minded and independent. Their relationship should be less over the top and more natural. Make us believe it and feel sad when Anakin goes bad. No more of this she died because she lost the will to live crap.
    Have some villains show up in the first movie and stay through until the third one. Yes, Darth Maul was cool but he died immediately with no real character development and had to be replaced by surrogates such as Count Dooku and General Grievous. Why not have had him stay until the late second movie or even the early third one? We get to know him a little, see him fight the bad guys-maybe beat them thoroughly–and then he gets his comeuppance in act three. Maybe Palpatine employs him with the secret plan that either Anakin will defeat him and join the dark side–or perhaps the best man will win. So Ray Park wasn’t an actor so much as a stuntman. No problem. Get him into an acting workshop, give him at least the basics. Done.
    Either drop Qui-gon all together or have him be the apprentice to Obi-wan and have him die heroically early on. Obi-wan, Anakin and Padme should be the main focus of the story. Everyone and everything else is secondary.
    Why not have the clones be the result of a mad eugenics war? Perhaps the Sith or somebody is creating an army to conquer the Galaxy and the Republic capture their own clone machines and grow some soldiers (or have them be reprogrammed to fight for the Republic). Yes, it’s a more simple approach. But Star Wars and simple go well together so why over-complicate things too much? Also, the droids were laughably bad opponents in the trilogy and shouldn’t have been there in the first place.
    Either no Jar Jar all together or replace him a more mellow, less spastic character. He really served no purpose in the story (other then to piss off adults and make kids buy toys). The idea of a cgi character was cool but the character himself was not.
    Character and story are the key elements to a satisfying movie–Star Wars or not. Sadly, we did not get this in any of the three prequel movies.


Episode 7 and beyond...

    In Fall of 2012, George Lucas sold Lucasfilm (and Star Wars) to Disney. The Mouse immediately decided they would do a Episode 7 movie as part of a new trilogy. Additionally, JJ Abrams will direct the film. I think Abrams sensibilities are well-suited to Star Wars (and a lot less so to Star Trek–but that’s another story).
 
    Will the new trilogy succeed? Probably. But I’m not sure I really care anymore... also, no matter how many classic SW actors get involved, this story should’ve been told decades ago. Now that they’re all old and able, at best, to mentor new characters in the story it just won’t be the same. People will come in with big expectations (like before with TPM) and come out disappointed. You simply can’t go home again so there’s no pointing in expecting to relive your childhood with new films.  
    They should not set the movies after Return of the Jedi. Go somewhere else, if you must make more. Do Knights of the Old Republic--or come up with something all-together new but using the familiar elements (Jedi, space battles, etc.) Trying to ride the classic trilogy’s coat-tails further is only a recipe for fan disappointment in the end.  
    In the end though, no matter what happens we’ll always have the classic trilogy as it existed and nobody will ever be able to take that away from us, no matter how many sub-par prequels or sequels get made.
   They also want to do a new SW movie every year. Every in-between year will be a stand alone film that ties into some aspect of the overall universe. Personally, I think this is a terrible idea and will burn people out on Star Wars, ultimately ruining the brand. As it is, Lucasfilm had milked the concept hard this last decade and this will only make things worse (I’m already sick of Star Wars–something I never believed could be possible at one time).
    May the Force be with you...

DKA

Something to Believe In...

    Religion is a divisive issue. Is there a Supreme Being that created us all? Or did life just evolve somehow? The idea of offering penance to a deity has been around as long as man has existed.
    Over the past two thousand years many terrible things have been done in the name of God. People of other faiths have been oppressed, persecuted and even murdered. Children have been molested, the weak minded have been lead about to and fro by men who use God to have their own way. It has not even stopped to this day and age.
    Is Religion fundamentally bad? Is it wrong to have faith in an all powerful Creator? It’s a decision we all must come to in our own time and our own way. If that spiritual need is present in your heart, or alternatively absent, then you should do whatever you feel is right for you.
    Stripping away the politics of the matter, a system of belief where people attempt to better themselves is not fundamentally bad. Can anyone really say teaching people to love one another is a bad thing? Tolerance, understanding and love are things we need more of in this world as well an ability to step into another’s shoes and see their perspective, whether or not we ultimately agree with it.
    Beliefs are an important aspect of a person’s character. Even more so in fiction. While I can know someone in real life and not be clear on their every defining character belief it would be death for a writer not to expound upon these qualities within the confines of a fictional tale. A character with no beliefs is hollow and inaccessible to the reader. 
    Often, writers don’t give characters actual religious beliefs. Either because they’re atheists themselves or perhaps they don’t feel like putting up with the hassle that will inevitably bring when a reader who disagrees with that point of view assimilates the material and protests. Primarily being a SF writer myself I haven’t ventured much into the territory myself, more often because it doesn’t seem like it really matters to the character in the circumstances presented.
    If a character believes in God–or doesn’t–it can be an effective story tool, assuming the writer had the competency to make it interesting and relevant in-context to the character’s world view or journey within the story. Simply portraying a character as a redneck hick because of his religious views, or contrarily as a godless liberal, is sloppy writing and demonstrates a distinct lack of understanding of the fundamentals of character building. People are not stereotypes and a character cannot afford to be either.

    To demonstrate, take Star Trek V. The main antagonist, Sybok, embarks on a journey to find the Vulcan paradise Sha-ka-ree. There, he hopes to meet God himself and learn the meaning of existence. It’s a terrible movie but does manage to effectively use a character’s religious drive to compel him toward his ultimate goal in life. Imagine what a well written story could do with something like that.
    Beliefs are important. No matter where a character gets them, they define their very existence. Whether from religion, a good parent or a role model, a character learns to be a good person. To trust in strangers, offer help to those in need and spread love around. Conversely, the same can be said for negative tendencies–a character learned to be cruel and inhumane, to take from the weak and spread misery. Our life experiences help define our beliefs and make us who we are.
    Of course, a character has to learn and grow in context of the tale a writer is telling too. If a character doesn’t learn or change from their experiences, what is the impetus of the story? Certainly, Star Wars is about the good guys versus the bad guys on the surface level. But on a deeper level, it’s also about Luke Skywalker moving from the role of a subservient adolescent to the role of a man and assuming all the responsibilities that being the last of the Jedi encompasses.
(I am aware, of course, that one can tell a story where the character learns nothing. But the more satisfying visceral stories always have some element of change to them. Something the reader/viewer can take from the tale, even if it does end up being a relatively straight forward concept such as maturity).
    Religion and belief can also be effective in a story when it comes to the examination of whether people are inherently good or evil. Are we born a certain way or do we learn behavior along the way? Perhaps it’s a mixture of the two? If we are born a certain way, inclined to good or cursed with evil, why is that so and can we do anything to fight nature. Are we free willed or destined to a certain path... If we are born neutral, why do men ever incline their nature toward doing bad? Is it malice or self interest? The possibilities are endless and interesting in a capable writer’s hands.
    The best tales are reflections of real life. Tales of good and evil. Of belief that motivated a character to make one of two choices along their life path. Whether they brought hope to the oppressed or pain and misery to others. Whether they can, or even should, stray from whatever path they have chosen and the end results of doing, or not doing, so.

DKA