| Author |
|
Michael Roberts
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 20 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 11270
|
| Posted: 10 September 2017 at 1:11pm | IP Logged | 1
|
post reply
|
|
I think it's important to ask the question, rather than assuming Disney's motives are good and pure.
-----
I really don't. It's show business, and I'm less concerned with Disney's motives as I am with its execution. If Rey starts lecturing Kylo Ren on his toxic masculinity, or Rose starts bemoaning that she's a model minority, we can start discussing inappropriately working in agendas, but Rey and Jyn being leads is far far from anything being skewed.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Conrad Teves
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 28 January 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 1398
|
| Posted: 10 September 2017 at 4:23pm | IP Logged | 2
|
post reply
|
|
You've been saving me a great deal of typing, Michael.
The more popular the product, the louder the sniping by detractors. Sort of inevitable, I suppose. I thought the object of the "blockbuster" exercise was to create entertainment that appealed to the broadest audience possible. All told, Disney has currently has about 3 billion reasons to think they are doing a good job.
If you asked them would they rather make a critically acclaimed fan-favorite movie like Blade Runner, which has made very little money, or a lighter, popcorn-fueled mega blockbuster like TFA, or (they hope) TLJ, you can guess their answer.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
e-mail
|
| |
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 13976
|
| Posted: 11 September 2017 at 8:00pm | IP Logged | 3
|
post reply
|
|
Fair points. I fully acknowledge that I'm no longer the target demographic for these films. Still, it's a hard thing to come to terms with, emotionally. Sort of like a marriage slowly dissolving. Again, I don't begrudge anyone who loves these films, but I do find myself scratching my head at how they've been so wholeheartedly embraced.
It should be noted that STAR WARS pretty much started as a weird little art film (despite being backed by a major studio). Ever since then, it's become more and more about the business and the merchandising. I think the last traces of artfulness in the series ended when Lucas gave it up, and it's now about brand management and demographics, more than anything else. A bad thing? Perhaps not.
Still, I saw STAR WARS-themed, Bounty-brand paper towels in a store, today, so I'd say we're about a half-step from STAR WARS: THE TOILET PAPER. Not to say that the films haven't already been heavily merchandised, over the decades, but rather that the merchandising now seems to be much more aggressive, and is spilling into many new sorts of products (like cosmetic makeup and soup).
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Richard Stevens
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 04 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1126
|
| Posted: 14 September 2017 at 7:47pm | IP Logged | 4
|
post reply
|
|
Rey is the best part of the new films. Her whole backstory as a solitary scavenger hit me hard, and I am *hardly* the one they're selling her dolls and costumes to. She rules. Kylo Ren is a little turd. Looking forward to Rey, Chewie, Luke & R2 having some adventures.
(edited for they're)
Edited by Richard Stevens on 15 September 2017 at 6:28am
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Shaun Barry
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 08 December 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 5270
|
| Posted: 14 September 2017 at 8:00pm | IP Logged | 5
|
post reply
|
|
"...so I find myself wondering if a prominent Asian cast member is just properly diverse casting, or an attempt to help broaden the film's appeal in that market."
Why can't it be both?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Robbie Parry
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 June 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 7770
|
| Posted: 15 September 2017 at 12:15pm | IP Logged | 6
|
post reply
|
|
I think the last traces of artfulness in the series ended when Lucas gave it up, and it's now about brand management and demographics, more than anything else.
***
In my opinion, REVENGE OF THE SITH was a feature-length toy commercial. ;-)
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 13976
|
| Posted: 15 September 2017 at 6:15pm | IP Logged | 7
|
post reply
|
|
Why can't it be both?
+++++++++++
It's not necessarily a bad thing. If little girls and minorities feel represented, now, that's a good thing. It's just that the thought of this stuff possibly being motivated by profit and politics makes me a bit uneasy.
I was talking about this to a nerdy friend (who's a minority), today. We both agreed that STAR TREK set the pattern for doing it right, by casting diversely/colorblindly whenever possible, and even trying to sneak things past the censors. That was more about sending a positive message than it was boosting ratings and generating advertising revenue. Heck, the show risked alienating the southern states with that famous interracial kiss in "Plato's Stepchildren".
My friend agreed that this new era of STAR WARS feels more than a little calculated, and, as a minority, the vibe it sends out doesn't exactly reassure him that it's all for the good.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 13976
|
| Posted: 15 September 2017 at 6:19pm | IP Logged | 8
|
post reply
|
|
In my opinion, REVENGE OF THE SITH was a feature-length toy commercial. ;-)
+++++++++++
I often wonder how much that comes down to Lucas, and how much to marketing. In all of the interviews and whatnot I've seen, Lucas tends to be more about experimental filmmaking techniques and storytelling. Marketing is surely a consideration, but I wouldn't necessarily say that was his sole motivation, even during the prequel era.
A lot of people think he crapped out all of the sequel/prequel movies after STAR WARS just to make a quick buck, but I'd argue that's much more what's happening now--moreso than it ever was during Lucas' reign.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Matt Hawes
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 13710
|
| Posted: 15 September 2017 at 6:41pm | IP Logged | 9
|
post reply
|
|
Greg Kirkman wrote:
| ...A lot of people think he crapped out all of the sequel/prequel movies after STAR WARS just to make a quick buck, but I'd argue that's much more what's happening now--moreso than it ever was during Lucas' reign.. |
|
|
I am no fan of the prequels, but I agree totally with this statement. I do believe Lucas's marketing considerations were secondary to his desire to tell the story his way. And I also think that Disney's considerations are more on marketing than story. Hell, they as much as stated a such when they bought the property, mentioning they already had the young female audience with Disney's princesses, and they wanted Star Wars to get the young male audience.
My guess is Rey and other female leads in the franchise (which, I must say I have no problem with in any event) is Disney trying to reach both young males and females. That isn't a bad thing, but I do wish they were doing a better job with how the stories are being executed. "The Force Awakens" is every bit the rehash many have accused it of being, and "Rogue One" was an unnecessary prequel that did nothing to further the story.
I get playing it "safe" in terms of story after the Lucas prequels, but perhaps they played it too darn safe.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Michael Roberts
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 20 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 11270
|
| Posted: 15 September 2017 at 7:08pm | IP Logged | 10
|
post reply
|
|
I am no fan of the prequels, but I agree totally with this statement. I do believe Lucas's marketing considerations were secondary to his desire to tell the story his way. And I also think that Disney's considerations are more on marketing than story.
-------
Whatever George Lucas or Kathleen Kennedy intended with their respective trilogies, Lucasfilm has been all about marketing and branding since shortly after the first film came out. From the STAR WARS HOLIDAY SPECIAL to the DROIDS cartoon to SHADOWS OF THE EMPIRE to the Expanded Universe, Lucasfilm has been pumping out characters and stories to sell stuff for almost 40 years. Let's not pretend this is something new with Disney.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Michael Roberts
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 20 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 11270
|
| Posted: 15 September 2017 at 7:41pm | IP Logged | 11
|
post reply
|
|
SHADOWS OF THE EMPIRE was literally, "Let's do a massive multiplatform tie-in and merchandising push for a movie... without actually making a movie." As much as I enjoyed the N64 game, I felt kind of cheated a few years after the fact when I realized it wasn't really the "unmade sequel" it originally presented itself as. As far as I'm concerned, Lucasfilm under Disney has yet to do something as mercenary.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 13976
|
| Posted: 15 September 2017 at 7:53pm | IP Logged | 12
|
post reply
|
|
I am no fan of the prequels, but I agree totally with this statement. I do believe Lucas's marketing considerations were secondary to his desire to tell the story his way. And I also think that Disney's considerations are more on marketing than story. Hell, they as much as stated a such when they bought the property, mentioning they already had the young female audience with Disney's princesses, and they wanted Star Wars to get the young male audience.
+++++++++++++++++
I think there's a case to be made that they went into this trilogy without any real plan, and might very well be making it up as they go along. Did they really have Rey and Snoke and all those Mystery Box elements worked out during the making of TFA?
Of course, STAR WARS began as a single film, and then ended up as a made-up-as-they-went trilogy, whereas general narrative thrust of the prequels really WAS planned out in advance, with only the specifics fluctuating from film to film.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 13976
|
| Posted: 15 September 2017 at 7:57pm | IP Logged | 13
|
post reply
|
|
Whatever George Lucas or Kathleen Kennedy intended with their respective trilogies, Lucasfilm has been all about marketing and branding since shortly after the first film came out. From the STAR WARS HOLIDAY SPECIAL to the DROIDS cartoon to SHADOWS OF THE EMPIRE to the Expanded Universe, Lucasfilm has been pumping out characters and stories to sell stuff for almost 40 years. Let's not pretend this is something new with Disney.
+++++++++++++
I get the impression that at first, Lucas really just wanted to fund his state-of-the-art filmmakers' retreat and roll his proceeds back into making experimental films, but STAR WARS and its marketing machine mutated into a massive and self-sustaining entity, and so he just rolled with it.
Lucas has said many times over the years that his heart lies with independent and experimental filmmaking and technology. He's never quite seemed comfortable as the head of a corporation.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 13976
|
| Posted: 15 September 2017 at 8:00pm | IP Logged | 14
|
post reply
|
|
SHADOWS OF THE EMPIRE was literally, "Let's do a massive multiplatform tie-in and merchandising push for a movie... without actually making a movie." As much as I enjoyed the N64 game, I felt kind of cheated a few years after the fact when I realized it wasn't really the "unmade sequel" it originally presented itself as. As far as I'm concerned, Lucasfilm under Disney has yet to do something as mercenary.
++++++++++++++
I don't quite know if I'd call that "mercenary". Even at the time, it seemed more to me like Lucasfilm both testing the waters regarding audience demand for new STAR WARS, while simultaneously stoking the flames for the prequels which were then in development. It was a clever marketing concept, and it's not like they obfuscated the fact that there wasn't an actual movie to base the merchandise on. Indeed, they were pretty darn open about that.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Matt Hawes
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 13710
|
| Posted: 15 September 2017 at 9:50pm | IP Logged | 15
|
post reply
|
|
Michael Roberts wrote:
| ...Let's not pretend this is something new with Disney... |
|
|
Please show me where I stated that.
Seriously, you often come off combative for its own sake sometimes.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
James Woodcock
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 21 September 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4017
|
| Posted: 20 September 2017 at 12:00am | IP Logged | 16
|
post reply
|
|
Mark Hamill is tweeting to watch Monday night football on October 9th. For no reason.
In a world (deep voice) where movies get trailers nearly a year before release, it is refreshing how Lucasfilm are marketing these films. Late trailers and little to no actual plot details revealed.
Makes a change from what went on with the prequels where nothing was a surprise
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
