Remake The Last Jedi

It's multifaceted really.

 

A great idea, since the existing film was so awful.

Of course it won't happen, but I think that it's great that the people who gave us the steaming pile of crap that was "Last Jedi" must suffer this indignity.

 

I even thought Brick was terrible.

The guy just has no talent or taste whatsoever.

 

He also did "Looper". I'm perplexed explain exactly to me why he has no talent? He took the narrative in an unexpected direction (which is a good thing) and had a more diverse cast this time around (also a good thing IMHO) so, what exactly, were his sins?

The film is flawed in some areas but, frankly, I enjoyed the fact that the film went in unexpected directions. Why is everyone so butt hurt over this movie? I found it an improvement over Abrams film which was a stealth remake of the first film that Lucas made playing almost as a fan tribute. I have to wonder if part of the reaction is that he took some risks with the second film that Abrams wasn't willing to do with the first in re-establishing the series.

The guy won a Director's Guild Award for his work on "Breaking Bad" as well (he directed three episodes).

 

Yeah, Looper should have ended his career, but somehow he survived. God that film was bad.

"Unexpected directions", like making Luke's painful realizations upon seeing Rey holding out the lightsaber into a moment of slapstick comedy. That sort of "unexpected direction" was flippant and was disrespectful to the first film. Indeed many of his choices were not "risks" so much as they seemed like transparent efforts to slap the writer and director of The Force Awakens in the face. His contempt for the characters that were established in The Force Awakens, and his contempt for the audience, came through loud and clear in far too many scenes.

 

That's one part of it. Certain fans of the franchise did not agree with the direction of character development of the classic characters and I think these same fans aren't interested in a more diverse cast just to have a diverse cast. I don't think there's anything wrong with a diverse cast if it serves the story at hand. But in this case it seemed forced to those up in arms.

Also it was things that Lucasfilm, Kennedy and Johnson said about fans who voice disdain for the direction of the movies by calling them incendiary names publicly for not liking their movie/direction. And I believe Abrams did too. But whatever.
And I should add - certain fans haven't been too respectful either - so it goes both ways.

People can disagree with the direction of the movies - and that's ok. People can like the direction of the movies too - and that's ok.

I don't really care either way what happens at this point. I'm not a fan of what Kennedy and Rian did to the movie(s) and the characters and that's ok. I can move along with life.

I did enjoy the Han solo movie for the most part. I was surprised after viewing it - I was wanting to see more adventures of Han and Chewie.

So for me - not all of Star Wars is bad necessarily. I'm just not a fan of the political agendas being inserted into the movies. I would like them to be fun again and with escapism - I don't want to see that in their world they are having the same political/social issues we are experiencing. I'd like to get away from all that and just be entertained.

That's why I find this pledge thing fascinating. I don't think it'll happen realistically. But I've never seen anything like it before have you?

 

It wasn’t slapstick comedy; it was satire. The subtext of this scene among many scenes is loud and clear. “Let the past die; kill it if you have to.” This is Rian Johnson adding something to the saga, moving it forward, introducing the gray areas. Things just aren’t as black and white as they used to be in this saga. Luke is not the caricature some fans want him to be; he is an actual character with an arc and all the feelings and flaws that go along with that arc. He is disillusioned and he is lost, and that makes him a far more interesting character.

 

I will admit I had problems with "Looper" but that was largely around how it side stepped the paradoxes of the story. It had a fascinating premise but, to be sure, it wasn't perfect and I disliked the way the narrative was developed but I don't think it's an awful film by any means. It seems that people who dislike a film (taste being the only aspect that one can't really account for) automatically assume that the director is "untalented" (I'm referring to the previous post that I quoted). My disliking certain elements doesn't mean I think it's a bad film--I would have done things a bit differently myself but Rian Johnson developed the story the way he liked and played with tropes of time travel movies in an interesting way even if I didn't always like the resolution. To me there's a distinction between a film I don't like and a truly "bad" movie. Given the critical success of the film and the fact that many fans were fine with the developments in the film to me indicates it's not a bad film just one that didn't please everyone and those that wanted to see a different outcome.

You do realize that there was humor--sometimes at the expense of the characters--in the first film, right? I didn't see any contempt for the characters nor the audience. The unexpected directions I found interesting was Luke's doubt in himself and the fact that it took someone like he was in the beginning to turn him around. The whole issue with his nephew was also interesting. The humor didn't bother me nor do I think it was designed to "disrespect" the first trilogy of films.

The fact that he felt that the Jedi were dead and that the force was a possible dead end as well was an interesting turn about to see and hear. I was disappointed that there wasn't a full on battle between him and his nephew but I thought that the way they made him "appear" was kind of clever and hinted at the fact that he had far more power than we ever saw in the previous trilogy.

As a long time fan who saw the first film on the first day it was showing in San Francisco way back in 1977 and someone who has enjoyed the first trilogy a lot (although I felt that, if anything, one could argue that the humor here was very much in keeping with "The Empire Strikes Back" and "Return of the Jedi") and really disliked the first film in the second set of trilogies (it got better with each film but it never did overcome Lucas' inability to craft good dialog). If anything THAT film would benefit from a remake but there's no way Disney is going to allow someone else to remake a film that was just made. Paramount has been very aggressive at protecting their "Star Trek" franchise and much the same will, no doubt, be true here as well.

 

Such absolute bullspit. The fans confuse watching a movie and investing their time with owning the film. The fans can no more remake a film or order a film to be remade than they can move the Sun in the sky. Crazy crybaby, nutty fans with no lives of their own.

From the studio's perspective, the film made $1.3 billion worldwide and got largely positive reviews (91% on Rotten Tomatoes, 85 on Metacritic). It's very hard to argue with that. (As I said in another thread, I didn't love the film, didn't hate it, but thought there was more good than bad in it. It was good, not great.)

I get that some fans feel the film was too negative and they don't like the fate of certain characters, but my advice to them would be: a) get a life, b) go out in the real world and get laid, and c) create something of your own and thrill the world with your own film or story. Don't tear down somebody else's work because it doesn't suit your own ideas.

It's one thing to criticize a movie, but quite another to have the sheer arrogance to say, "hey, I think the studio should throw that out and try again." And this is from the same audience who is angry at George Lucas because he changed his own films in an effort to make them better in a way that appealed to him.

The best way to tell a studio that you don't like their films? Don't pay to see them, either in the theater or in home video. Vote with your dollars.

 

To start with the last first...I do think it's pretty interesting. I've never seen anything like this before but it really is just a new version of an old trick--an independent filmmaker goes to potential investors (dentists, doctors, rich folks, etc.) as Sam Raimi did for "The Evil Dead" but, in that case, he had a script, a cast, a location and material to show the investors.

I have no idea what Johnson or Kennedy said about fans who didn't like the direction of the films but didn't that come AFTER the film was made and shown? The same thing happened to Lucas when he did his second trilogy. I don't enjoy the first one overall (although I do have some scenes that I enjoyed) and the other two had their moments but, really, when directors pay fan service (as was evident with the last Ridley Scott Alien film) to the audience, I also think that they won't please everyone and can, sometimes, make an inferior film as a result.

As far as the diversity, isn't it better to pick the best actor for the job rather than focus on white, black, Asian, etc. ? I could really care less if the diversity was just to appeal to a larger market frankly because to me at least there was very little attempt to do that until recently. On the other hand, I wouldn't call them racist if they hadn't done it. I've always felt that a film should represent its audience in terms of the casting.

I honestly feel this is a mountain being made out of a molehill myself.

This reminds of a child having a tantrum because they didn't get what they wanted. If I dislike a film after seeing it, I vote with my wallet.

 

This is what makes the effort worthwhile, despite there being no chance of it actually happening: the irate, crybaby responses from the apologists.

 

That is what certain fans are saying - don't cast diversity just for the sake of diversity. But the films are casting diversity for the sake of diversity and to appeal to a larger audience.

 

I think they did with the Han Solo movie - backlash or blowback - however you want to phrase that.

 

It's silly. If I hate the Beatles' White Album, do I have the right to remake it? Do I have the right to tell the surviving Beatles to remake it? It's absolute bullspit.

There is a point where the nutty fans have to STFU. And I'm not a huge fan of Star Wars VIII: The Last Jedi, but I think it has valid creative choices, no better or worse than any movie. The fans totally have a right to express an opinion, write nasty reviews... hell, picket at Disney's Buena Vista Street gate and yell at Kathy Kennedy's car as she's driving into the lot. But to tell the studio to remake the film is beyond the pale. It's rude and obnoxious behavior. I think harassing artists like this is wrong, whether or not you think their work is good or bad.

There is a point where you have to just shrug and say, "it's not to my tastes" and just walk away. Going beyond that is just a foolish waste of time.

And that's the right answer. I think at some point, Disney and the Lucasfilm people have to make the best movies they know how to make. The moment they try to kowtow to the fans and make the precise films that the fans want to see, it's gonna go south. The fans themselves can't agree on what they want, and even if they did, who can say if it will work with a mass audience, let alone make sense creatively? Movies by committee never work.

 

It's not even remotely the same thing. TLJ was the second film in a commissioned trilogy, that is supposed to tell a particular story. The third hasn't even been made yet. If one director does a poor job of it - as was the case here - then the effort can be discarded and the film re-made. There is no reason in the world why this couldn't happen.

I realize that it *won't* happen, hut there's no reason why it couldn't. Films get re-made all the time. All it would take is for Disney to admit its mistake and excommunicate TLJ from the canon, and that would be it.

 

They are absolutely not going to do that.
If Disney gave in to the reactionary fan base, this would never end.
Every film from here on in would have shouts for an immediate remake by a segment of an audience.

film goers have no right to an immediate remake.
readers have no right to demand a book be re-written to their tastes.

You pay your money, and if you don't like the thing there's nothing you can do about it. Except of course to have an opinion.

 

Your stating your opinion of its some kind of objective fact. Disney is supposed to jump through hoops to remake a film that made $1.3 billion dollars, because you don't like it? "Good" and "bad" are subjective. $1.3 billion is not subjective. Disney doesn't give a darn what a few malcontents think, nor should they.

 

In the distant future a dscendant of Kenneth Branagh will film his adaption of this trilogy, and he may make a bunch of different decisions.

But in our lifetimes the most anyone can hope for is some kind of alternate cut, if Disney wants to make some sort of tv mini series out of the trilogy, or if they want to make some sort of butt-numbing single six-hour film out of the best parts of this approx. seven hour trilogy.

 

May be a bad example, simce didn't the Beatles last album get remixed a dozen years ago or so, to remove the string sections that George Martin was so keen on? (If only there were some music forum full of Beatles fans who might know if that was so. ...found it: Let It Be... Naked - Wikipedia )

 

I have to say that I always respect your point of view and enjoy your posts. I'm sure you were probably referring to the more rabid and vocal fanboys but unfortunately, I'm taking the comment above a little personal because I posed a perspective that was unexpected and even unfathomable a week or two ago. I'm far from the nutty fan who has been whining for the last 6+ months. I'm not going to STFU.

The Last Jedi has flaws, I think everyone would agree. This is coming from someone who genuinely liked the movie but the more I think about it, the more intriguing calling a mulligan sounds. The reason is that this movie is not just a stand-alone story. It is the bridging episode in a trilogy that pretty much f*#@ed the story arc, creating a mess for anyone who follows to have to clean up somehow. I cannot imagine that Abrams hasn't for a moment thought WTF despite trying to tow the company line.

My point is that it would be unprecedented for a studio to say "yes, we need to try this one again". An entire generation or two of pop literature was relegated non-canon, why not this movie?

I'm not fanatical about this idea and doubt it would ever happen. But wouldn't it be interesting to give Abrams the reins for 8 & 9 in order to create a cohesive story in line with an overall vision of a single person? This is my sole criticism of how Disney has handled Star Wars to this point, or at least the new trilogy, that there is no consistent vision when it comes to story. After all, isn't that a base element that makes a movie great?

Oh yeah, loved the movie but Solo should have been held until Christmas 2018.

 

I haven't seen TLJ, but a lot of fans consider it worse than the prequels.

 

The remade The Hulk five years after Ang Lee's flop, so I guess it's possible.

 

Different movie, different story, very different approach. As far as I'm concerned, it's a new movie with the same characters, but different actors... like the Bond films.

No, it would not be interesting. It'd be stupid. And what about the fans who disliked Abrams' film? What do you do then?

At what point do the filmmakers get to ignore the audience and just try to make good films? You clearly have never made a film and have no concept of the time, money, effort, imagination, planning, and the vast number of people needed to pull off an operation like this. It's as stupid as saying, "ya know, that 40-story building over there looks ugly. I'm going to demand that the owners knock it down and put up a building that I want, because I think I know how to make buildings better than they do." Ditto with music, art, photography, TV, fiction, or anything else. In the grand scheme of things, Star Wars is just a movie. It's not anything more than that. There are good Star Wars movies, bad Star Wars movies, middling Star Wars films, even great Star Wars films. Crap happens. Get over it.

You hate it, fine -- write a script, get an agent, sell it to Hollywood, and make your own movie.

Note there is a famous film out there that was essentially the filmmaker's version of a previous movie: and that was Bryan Singer's Superman Returns from 2004. He basically hated all the films that came after Superman II, so this was his attempt at "righting" the franchise. It did OK and not great, and he was not asked back for future sequels. I think it had a mixed reception at best.

 

You live a blessed life.