New ‘Star Wars’ gets a writer

[crazy4wdw]

New ‘Star Wars’ gets a writer

By BROOKS BARNES - The New York Times

Luke Skywalker has a new screenwriter: Michael Arndt, the Oscar-winning scribe behind “Little Miss Sunshine” and “Toy Story 3.”

Ever since Disney plunked down $4 billion for Lucasfilm last month and announced plans for a seventh “Star Wars” movie, entertainment bloggers and Hollywood trade reporters have been coming unhinged: Who will write it and who will direct it? We. Must. Know. Right. Now.

Lucasfilm and Disney — you can inject them with truth serum if you like, they still won’t give up the location of the rebel base — refused to give any more details. But then Vulture, relying on anonymous sources, reported that Arndt, who is also working on a new Pixar movie and the script for “The Hunger Games: Catching Fire,” had written a 40- to 50-page treatment for a new “Star Wars.”

Lucasfilm confirmed the news, saying in a brief post on Starwars.com that Arndt will be the lone screenwriter for the next “Star Wars” installment, planned for release by Disney in 2015.

But who will direct it? We! Must! Know! Right! Now! (George Lucas, to the relief of many fans, given the last three “Star Wars” movies, will serve as a consultant.)

The studios were silent about a director, but the news media has been digging. Steven Spielberg told “Access Hollywood” that “no, no,” he had no interest. Quentin Tarantino told Entertainment Weekly, “I could so care less.”

 

[lockedoutlogic]

The screenwriter is important...

but the story on the last three blew. Every fan KNEW what the story arc was...and yet it was done so badly, and the "filler" material outside of the main story premise was complete garbage.

So i'm just as concerned with who's writing this thing.

And as far as director goes...i would be shocked if any too "big name" would take it. What's in it for them? other than money - which probably isn't that good anyway from disney - they don't do much for themselves by devoting 2 years of their lives to it.

a young up and comer of sci-fi "genre" type guy would probably pull off something better anyway.

My pick would be Ron Moore - the guy that cut his teeth on star trek the next generation and deep space nine (the excellent - character driven series) and the battlestar: galactica reboot.
Perhaps he and a director (as he's a writer/executive producer type) could work in consort...to perhaps produce something with a tad bit of depth...which george lucas and that hollywood space clown Rick McCallum failed at like an italian general

Tarentino is terrible anyway...for the record

 

[HubbDave]

Possible return of Mr. Vader?
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105...r-wars-rumor-disney-to-resurrect-darth-vader/

 

[Pumbaa7287]

The rumor I've heard for a director was the woman who directed Brave. Supposedly she left Pixar recently to work on a top secret project at LucasFilm, and when people have asked her if she's working on Star Wars on twitter she's been very coy in giving non-answers, like 'we'll see' and 'who knows'

I'm at work so I can't give all the links, but her name is Brenda Chapman

http://www.slashfilm.com/is-brave-co-director-brenda-chapman-involved-in-star-wars-episode-vii/

 

[Tinkh]

The world would benefit from Joss Whedon writing all the epic movies

 

[DisneyBelle27]

The world would benefit from Joss Whedon writing all the epic movies

^^^this

 

[yitbos96bb]

Tarantino is responsible for one of the greatest films ever made and is an excellent director.... But yes, he would not be a great choice for Star Wars.


Since Abrams expressed n desire, my top choices are Whedon, Favreau, or maybe Bryan Singer.

I love that Ardnt's treatment includes the original characters.... I'm guessing its going to be a pass the torch movie... If they stick to expanded universe continuity then probably surrounding Han and Leia's twins and younger son.

All I know is this... If Michael "The Butcher" Bay gets anywhere near this film, I'm done with it forever.

The screenwriter is important...

but the story on the last three blew. Every fan KNEW what the story arc was...and yet it was done so badly, and the "filler" material outside of the main story premise was complete garbage.

So i'm just as concerned with who's writing this thing.

And as far as director goes...i would be shocked if any too "big name" would take it. What's in it for them? other than money - which probably isn't that good anyway from disney - they don't do much for themselves by devoting 2 years of their lives to it.

a young up and comer of sci-fi "genre" type guy would probably pull off something better anyway.

My pick would be Ron Moore - the guy that cut his teeth on star trek the next generation and deep space nine (the excellent - character driven series) and the battlestar: galactica reboot.
Perhaps he and a director (as he's a writer/executive producer type) could work in consort...to perhaps produce something with a tad bit of depth...which george lucas and that hollywood space clown Rick McCallum failed at like an italian general

Tarentino is terrible anyway...for the record

 

[Brocktoon]

I think Arndt is a great choice for writer.

As for director, while I'd love Whedon, he'll likely not want to touch another huge legacy project while already shepherding the Avengers/Marvel universe. personally I'd like to see Brad Bird get a crack at it ... I thought he did a great live-action job with Mission Impossible. After seeing the new Planet of The Apes flick, I was also very impressed with Rupert Wyatt's ability to balance character and big budget action ... Wouldn't mind seeing him work in the Star Wars universe.

For the Tarantino record ... I think he's a better writer than director, and it can become a mess when he directs his own screenplays. He doesn't exactly like to edit down his own meanderings. I LOVE True Romance thanks to the Tarantino writing combined with Tony Scott's directing.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Sorry,folks...Tarantino is still overrated.


But that's ok...

As far as Whedon goes...I gotta go here: why?...exactly? Is he exalted?

I like avengers...but it's basically a popcorn movie like all the others. It was better written/directed than the Michel bay crap...but again, not exactly Shawshank.

I think the next Star Wars has to really reset and go the route of "empire"...a character driven story with a little depth and not a 3-D sideshow.

And if that can be pulled off...contrary to what the Disney sweatshop owners will want...the longterm profitability of the franchise will be much better served.

The original movies (pre-redonkulous cgi) generated a phenomena that lasted for 25 years on its own...
The new crap...makes money but has done serious damage to the foundation.

Hmmm? Which way should we go?

And bubka aside - the Dark Knight and Batman Begins we're probably the best fantasy/sci fi/ comic movies made...and it's not even close.

Nolan did that by limiting the fake crap...and it paid off.
Would love to see him do a Star Wars...but there's really not much in it for him.

 

[Brocktoon]

As far as Whedon goes...I gotta go here: why?...exactly? Is he exalted?

I like avengers...but it's basically a popcorn movie like all the others. It was better written/directed than the Michel bay crap...but again, not exactly Shawshank.

And that's what the Avengers was supposed to be ... a perfect translation of fun big screen comic book action. The Avengers comic was never dark and brooding like Batman, and to pull off the true feel of a Marvel team book in a single movie format could have been a disaster, but Whedon pulled it off without over interpreting the source material. It may not have been perfect, but it could have been worse in so many ways.

Joss may not be for everybody, but he deserves his loyal following. His strength lies in long format storytelling where he's allowed to develop detailed universes with characters who continue to evolve. He's known to handpick his actors and creative teams so that his long term vision still carries through from season to season. Not everything he does is perfect, but when watching full seasons of his TV work, you really start to appeciate how much he puts long term story and character above quick resolution. He's also the master of working with an ensemble cast ... sort of like a geek version of Frank Darabont. Season 3 and 5 of Buffy and his run on Astonishing X-Men are classic. Except for maybe Babylon 5, there weren't many genre shows back then that rewarded viewing season after season. He still has to grow more on his film expertise and directing where he only has a few hours to tell a whole story, but he's getting there. I kinda see him growing to the same category as Sam Raimi, Peter Jackson and Guillermo del Toro. He could also trap himself into a locked cultish geekdom cycle much like Bruce Campbell and Kevin Smith ... Hopefully Avengers was his ticket to much larger stardom

 

[yitbos96bb]

Sorry,folks...Tarantino is still overrated.

But that's ok...

As far as Whedon goes...I gotta go here: why?...exactly? Is he exalted?

I like avengers...but it's basically a popcorn movie like all the others. It was better written/directed than the Michel bay crap...but again, not exactly Shawshank.

I think the next Star Wars has to really reset and go the route of "empire"...a character driven story with a little depth and not a 3-D sideshow.

And if that can be pulled off...contrary to what the Disney sweatshop owners will want...the longterm profitability of the franchise will be much better served.

The original movies (pre-redonkulous cgi) generated a phenomena that lasted for 25 years on its own...
The new crap...makes money but has done serious damage to the foundation.

Hmmm? Which way should we go?

And bubka aside - the Dark Knight and Batman Begins we're probably the best fantasy/sci fi/ comic movies made...and it's not even close.

Nolan did that by limiting the fake crap...and it paid off.
Would love to see him do a Star Wars...but there's really not much in it for him.

Again... Tarantino made one of the greatest films ever... His films are strongly influential and are considered at the forefront of a style emphasizing dialogue and a stylistic portrayal violent action melding Hong Kong and western styles. His influence is seen all over. While you may not enjoy his films, which is valid as likes and dislikes are individualistic (ie I cant stand the Wizard of Oz but i recognize its place and influence on film). One can not be called overrated with that level of achievement under his belt.

Whedon created some extremely popular cult properties with the TV Buffyverse and (even more incredibly given its short run status) Firefly. With the Avengers he translated the comic book extremely well to the screen, in a way that satisfied a rabid fan base of the original source material and the average movie fan leading to big big bucks. This is not an easy trick to pull off. Look at the derision Lucas gets from fans due to the prequels. Whedon is a fan of Star Wars, sci fi and comics... Being a fan makes him sensitive to protecting the source material, which is a great reason for him to direct it. He's proven he can make a good film (and let's be honest Star Wars rocks but its not The Godfather; it's a pop corn flick), make a lot of money, and protect a franchise... Exactly what Star Wars needs... And he has a relationship with Disney.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

And that's what the Avengers was supposed to be ... a perfect translation of fun big screen comic book action. The Avengers comic was never dark and brooding like Batman, and to pull off the true feel of a Marvel team book in a single movie format could have been a disaster, but Whedon pulled it off without over interpreting the source material. It may not have been perfect, but it could have been worse in so many ways.

Joss may not be for everybody, but he deserves his loyal following. His strength lies in long format storytelling where he's allowed to develop detailed universes with characters who continue to evolve. He's known to handpick his actors and creative teams so that his long term vision still carries through from season to season. Not everything he does is perfect, but when watching full seasons of his TV work, you really start to appeciate how much he puts long term story and character above quick resolution. He's also the master of working with an ensemble cast ... sort of like a geek version of Frank Darabont. Season 3 and 5 of Buffy and his run on Astonishing X-Men are classic. Except for maybe Babylon 5, there weren't many genre shows back then that rewarded viewing season after season. He still has to grow more on his film expertise and directing where he only has a few hours to tell a whole story, but he's getting there. I kinda see him growing to the same category as Sam Raimi, Peter Jackson and Guillermo del Toro. He could also trap himself into a locked cultish geekdom cycle much like Bruce Campbell and Kevin Smith ... Hopefully Avengers was his ticket to much larger stardom

Ok...i'll give you that as an endorsement....

But what star wars DOESN'T need is "good clean fun"...which is what avengers ultimately is.

They need depth and (no pun intended) "dark side"...as in they need a real well written, well developed piece to offset the erosion done by the outright stupidity of the "prequels"

Its not about selling stuff...as statistics show they don't have that problem...its about long term appeal...which can regrow the legs that the dynamic dufuses lucas and mccallum chopped off with jar jar binks and "bad guys" that were less threatening than the characters on the adam west batman...

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Again... Tarantino made one of the greatest films ever... His films are strongly influential and are considered at the forefront of a style emphasizing dialogue and a stylistic portrayal violent action melding Hong Kong and western styles. His influence is seen all over. While you may not enjoy his films, which is valid as likes and dislikes are individualistic (ie I cant stand the Wizard of Oz but i recognize its place and influence on film). One can not be called overrated with that level of achievement under his belt.

Whedon created some extremely popular cult properties with the TV Buffyverse and (even more incredibly given its short run status) Firefly. With the Avengers he translated the comic book extremely well to the screen, in a way that satisfied a rabid fan base of the original source material and the average movie fan leading to big big bucks. This is not an easy trick to pull off. Look at the derision Lucas gets from fans due to the prequels. Whedon is a fan of Star Wars, sci fi and comics... Being a fan makes him sensitive to protecting the source material, which is a great reason for him to direct it. He's proven he can make a good film (and let's be honest Star Wars rocks but its not The Godfather; it's a pop corn flick), make a lot of money, and protect a franchise... Exactly what Star Wars needs... And he has a relationship with Disney.

pulp fiction was "cool"

not "one of the greatest movies ever"...it was just "cool" and exceeded everyone's expectations. kinda like the matrix.

but that is personal taste. the fact that every other movie tarentino has made is borderline if not full garbage lends credence to my opinion.

but it is just opinion.

yes, star wars is/was popcorn fantasy...which is ok. the problem is that the second set of trash still has to be atoned for...which means whatever is to follow has to go farther away from popcorn.

look...if you go back in time and watch star wars, empire, and jedi...they have some pretty rough dialogue and at times horrible acting...but watching it now makes it look like citizen kane. that is a big point that is missed: before 1999 the star wars movies were loved but never regarded as more than ok in acting and story...after '05 many if not most fans perceptions completely shifted to make the originals seem like masterpieces. Subconsciously...it just happened because the others were so over the top fake/bad.

and that is the result of the damage inflicted by this recent DOA films...

the puppet yoda in empire has some depth to him...as does the emperor of Jedi...even the brief but fan favorite admiral akbar can elicit a bit of a gut response...

that's where we need to go...not oscar material...but something that has an emotional attachment on some level.

good actors...jackson, portman, and mcgreggor...pretty much failed to do that...and they were the BEST actors by far.
Even Neeson's Qui Gon Jinn is flat...and he tried his best. but he's not developed...
an outsider who starts the downfall of the galaxy...dies at the hands of a clown with no explanation...goes away without ever being presented than more than a blip on the screen...and then gets name dropped with 3 minutes to go two movies later. what the hell?

now compare that Alec Guinness's appearances in Empire (fantastic) and even to complete the story in Jedi (again...a highly underrated scene)...
what did that take? 6 minutes of screen time total? and it completed the character.
In fact...the scene where luke departs to face vader in empire and yoda talks to Ben in the darkness as he is front lit by the departing ship is a brilliant scene...

And you know why? because it was written by Leigh Brackett and directed by Irv Kershner...

you what those two have in common? they're not named GEORGE LUCAS!!!

i'm off the grid...my point is that the story and the presentation/ rules placed when making the new movies have to be the most important considerations now....its worth tens of billions of dollars to do it right.

it has to be a throwback or something along the lines of peter jackson or nolan today...

nothing like bay/bruckheimer...

my take

 

[godoftheWorld]

Tarantino rocks!!!!!!!!

My name is Lt. Aldo Raines..........

Everyone has an opinion about him, you know what your opinion is worth, same as mine!!!!!!

Nothing!

 

[super mike b]

I am just happy that Star Wars lives on!