Customer Discussions > Movie forum

The Star Wars VII-IX Official Discussion Forum

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 126-150 of 635 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Nov 18, 2012 4:56:32 PM PST
D. Larson says:
I beg to differ.

Indiana Jones is not a film. It is a movie.

There's a difference; Jean Luc (Lucky) Godard made films. Wes Anderson makes films. David Fincher makes films.

But Indiana Jones is a movie. That is, it means to entertain without overtaxing my brain. On the whole, movies are more fun than films.

Satire.... It's what closes on Saturday night.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 18, 2012 5:47:22 PM PST
J. Baker says:
Now I beg to differ.

There's no sufficient difference between what David Fincher does and what Steven Spielberg does. The film/movie distinction is incredibly fuzzy.

The Indiana Jones's aren't so much movies as flicks, in that a flick is designed to be a thrill ride that puts practically no tax on the brain.

A film is primarily an intellectual puzzle as entertainment.
A movie-movie experience is a well-balanced entertainment of sensation and thought. A flick is basically intellectual empty calories.
And cinema is all that combined.
See, I can make silly distinctions too!

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 18, 2012 6:57:43 PM PST
AndrewA says:
Just because a film can break from reality doesn't mean it always should. You went too far.

Posted on Nov 19, 2012 9:41:40 AM PST
Film is the actual material a movie is made out of.
Flick is slang for movie.

Posted on Nov 19, 2012 10:13:58 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 19, 2012 10:14:15 AM PST
W.T. says:
Star Wars was more of an "event", really.

(Don't you just love semantics!)

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 19, 2012 12:00:03 PM PST
D. Larson says:
Which makes me wonder how far in the future will films no longer be called "films".

Already, a lot of movies are shot digital, edited digital, loaded onto hard drives and shipped to the theaters. At no point is any actual film involved. Twenty years from now, when long strips of silver-infused plastic are as out of date as telephone booths and DVDs, will people still put "A Film By Red Ruffansore" in the credits? Will poseurs still gas about the Mongolian documentary film they just saw? Will kids have no idea what their parents are talking about when they talk about films, the way they are perplexed by phones with wires coming out of them?

For that matter, how long will people still say, "Let's go the the videotape" when tape is as extinct as the Stegosaurus?

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 19, 2012 12:04:19 PM PST
D. Larson says:
How about pics? As in "Hicks Nix Sticks Pics"?

We can dig all the way back to "flickers" is you wanna get crazy.

Twenty-three skidoo, Sheik! We're off to the flickers!

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 19, 2012 7:50:39 PM PST
J. Baker says:
Just so long as it says "Fin" at the end they'll be called films. :->

The slang "flicks" which is still used today (cf. Netflix) was a diminutive of "flickers", referring to a certain tendency of old Nickelodeon fare that would literally have a flickering effect because the gate of the projector wasn't set right as the film passed through too fast or slow, and the illusion of continuous motion was broken by flickering white screen.

Movies haven't had that common problem for over a hundred years, and yet the usage of the slang goes on.
I think the same will hold true for the word "film", which has long been the most common way to refer to movies around the world.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 20, 2012 7:45:23 AM PST
C. J. Vasta says:
I hear Andrew Stanon's availible.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 20, 2012 9:46:49 PM PST
Anthony L. says:
UPDATE: Lawrence Kasdan and Simon Kinberg to write and produce Star Wars Episode 8 and 9.

This is the best possible news. Kasdan wrote Empire Strikes Back and Raiders of the Lost Ark.
It will be good to have an old hand giving creative advice.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 20, 2012 9:47:47 PM PST
Anthony L. says:
David Fincher has said: "A movie is made for audiences, but a film is made for audiences and directors."
I hope this clears that up.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 21, 2012 5:31:01 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 21, 2012 5:52:24 AM PST
W.T. says:
Too bad Leigh Brackett, the writer of the original Empire script before Kasdan reworked it, is no longer with us to contribute that vintage, pulp feel again. The "queen of space opera" had a lot cut out of her version of the screenplay, but she clearly was the one who transformed Han Solo from the borderline unlikable rogue in the first movie into the classic pulp-era space opera "scientific romance" scoundrel that he became in Empire.

Posted on Nov 21, 2012 5:51:01 AM PST
"I'm not an actor, I'm a movie star!"

Peter O'Toole (an actor), playing a movie star.

Posted on Nov 21, 2012 5:59:19 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 21, 2012 6:04:45 AM PST
Battle of Yavin (A New Hope): Luke is 19
25-29 ABY* New Jedi Order: Luke is 44-49, Jaina Solo is 16-20
40 ABY Legacy of the Force: Luke is 60, Jaina Solo is 31, Ben Skywalker is 13
43 ABY Fate of the Jedi: Luke is 63, Jaina Solo is 34, Ben Skywalker is 17
(Mark Hamill is 61)
*ABY (after the Battle of Yavin/A New Hope)

I don't see Disney covering the Yuzaan Vong (or however you spell it) War, considering the Yuzaan Vong are the Star Wars equivalent of Cenobites.

So, have Episode VII jump to...after the YV War?

Episode VII: A New Beginning

It is a dark time in the galaxy. Aliens from another galaxy have just slain 365 trillion sentient beings thanks to the combined incompetencies of the Jedi and the New Republic. Moving on...

Toto, I don't think the new movies are going to be in the EU.

And you know, I think I'm okay with that.

Posted on Nov 21, 2012 7:24:52 AM PST
Cavaradossi says:

I'm a huge fan of the Star Wars movies, but I've never read a single SW novel or played any of the computer game versions. As a result, your interesting post felt to me as though it come from some alternate reality, i.e. I had absolutely no idea what you were discussing!

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 21, 2012 7:34:53 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 21, 2012 10:27:54 AM PST
W.T. says:
Toto, I don't think the new movies are going to be in the EU.

And you know, I think I'm okay with that.


I'm okay with them ignoring events from the EU, just so long as they don't directly contradict them beyond the ability to do "continuity patching" to keep the EU whole (like when they had to reconcile Lucas' "rule of two" concept of the Sith with the previously-established Sith Empire from the comics. The result was a comic series and later novel that detailed the great Jedi-Sith War, where the Sith were wiped out almost, but the survivors established the "rule of two" scenario. An excellent set of stories that only existed because they had to patch their continuity back together to work with the prequels!)

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 21, 2012 9:30:00 AM PST
"I'm not a musician, I'm in a band."

Bill Wyman (being serious) 1965

Posted on Nov 21, 2012 9:32:07 AM PST

WTF is EU?

Empire Universe?

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 21, 2012 10:29:58 AM PST
W.T. says:
"Extended Universe" - The Star Wars (or any other fictional universe, if the term is applied to them) comics, novels and other materials that go beyond the original source material.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 21, 2012 11:03:45 AM PST
D. Larson says:
I think the young Jedi has hit on an important truth, there.

The vast, vast majority of the potential audience for Star Wars sequels have not read any of the paperbacks, played the video games or done more than glance at the animated series. Like Cavardossi, I don't know anything about those things, and likely never will.

More importantly, the worldwide audience (gotta make at least as much money worldwide as you do in the States) also know nothing about fanboy/comic geek culture. The new movies might take cues from the literary output, but it's doubtful that Disney will want to just film the paperbacks. Too complicated, too many backstories, and probably too much stuff about trade delegations and tariffs and Sith vs Jedi feuding. Star Wars plots are generally pretty simple; bad guys on these spaceships, good guys in these spaceships. Stir well and use lasers.

That, and screenwriters generally hate being told what to do by some nerdy novelist. Even if they used to be nerdy novelists themselves. Especially if they used to be nerdy novelists themselves.

Posted on Nov 21, 2012 11:04:14 AM PST
Cavaradossi says:
It used to be that, when one wants to use acronyms, one first spells out the term. On first reference, for instance, one wrote Extended Universe, and thereafter, EU. This way, everyone is tuned into what the writer is discussing, even if not every reader understands the reference.

It must be one of the many writing procedures that have gone out the window in the internet age. If so, I understand why it would, especially in texting. However, it does seem to assume that everyone is on the same page about a topic. In a forum discussion, that's a mighty big assumption.

Posted on Nov 21, 2012 11:11:59 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 21, 2012 11:13:50 AM PST
W.T. says:
An example of the Extended Universe and scriptwriters working in harmony is the work done for the Clone Wars TV show. They play well together (well, except for the whole Karen Traviss novel stink that caused her to leave her series incomplete and walk away, but there were other matters involved there irrelevant to this discussion). There's a nice interplay where the TV people borrow ideas and characters from the EU in a way that requires no knowledge of the EU, but it's a special treat for those "in the know".

Actually, Lucas himself did this in his prequels as well. The double-ended Darth Maul lightsaber was borrowed from a character in the comics. Some of the bit characters, like the sexy blue Jedi Aayla Secura, originated in the comics. That kind of back and forth makes both the EU and the movies/TV shows better. I would hate to lose that synergy, especially since it's a place where fans can have a little more influence. And it creates a few nice "easter eggs" for the hardcore fans.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 21, 2012 1:59:48 PM PST
Oh that universe.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 22, 2012 1:59:06 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 22, 2012 2:00:09 AM PST
M. Gaudet says:
If they had decided to make this in like 1992 or earlier i would have been interested but after Crystal Skull ruined the memories i had of Indiana jones and the star wars prequels were crap i honestly have little faith.

Star Wars was by a Maverick filmmaker making the films on his own terms outside Hollywood. Disney is the studio system and Hollywood= FAIL. I honestly would have preferred George direct them even if they were crap because at least they would have his stamp on them and be true Lucasfilms.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 22, 2012 2:04:22 AM PST
M. Gaudet says:
Brackett's script never officially published but leaked online illegally proved once and for all that Vader was not always intended to be Luke's father.
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in


This discussion

Discussion in:  Movie forum
Participants:  49
Total posts:  635
Initial post:  Nov 5, 2012
Latest post:  May 2, 2014

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 5 customers

Search Customer Discussions