Rogue One catch all thread

[lockedoutlogic]

Disney doesn't cut budgets really they just cut things from the plans so prices don't escalade higher. In Avatar's case nothing was really cut. I can't imagine them cutting much from Star Wars either and toy story is about as bare bones as it gets.

I'm going to crunch them numbers and figure out what the net difference is...I'll ask Siri

 

[TwoMisfits]

And by doing...risk not making the emotional tie to the parks that really take in the big time Bucks longterm

Literally - my mother and daughter were most wowed by Ollivanders in Universal. Why? B/c it was exactly like they imagined it in the book. When my daughter was picked for the ceremony and the wizard "found" her wand, it was a top 5 moment ever for her. We obviously bought the wand (win-win for Universal and us). But what strikes me about Ollivanders is it's 1. not a thrill ride, 2. completely free (no one needs to even buy the wand if they are picked), and 3. not that expensive to replicate. It just took taking the time to "get" why people loved Harry Potter. They loved the little stories and nuggets in the book. They loved the chance to BE Harry, the unassuming kid that was picked for heroism. They loved all the magic. I mean, when people mention there are only two "rides" in the new Diagon Alley land, I think they forget all that is there. There is also the Ollivanders show and another stage with different FREE and open stage shows all day that directly tie into the books (so it's 2 rides and 2+ shows for the one land). Plus the "character" meets of the Knight Bus and the Gringotts Money Exchange (where you can just walk through). And the fire-breathing dragon that operates a couple of times per hour...And Knockturn Alley, literally a secret stepping area into the Dark Arts with plenty of shopping but also plenty of free dark atmosphere and effects to walk through...this doesn't count all the wizards and wands around to cast spells and make it rain or make skeletons dance or find you your perfect robe to try on (again, and no need to buy), etc.

It is everything the books and movies were...why would it be so hard for Star Wars to do the same? We've all seen it in books and movies - let us live it...I don't want to live Disney's corporate vision of what I want. I want to live my experienced version of Star Wars!

 

[FlightlessDuck]

One thing I found interesting in the most recent trailer, is a battle seen on what appears to be a tropical beach/swamp planet.

That's Scarif.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

The battle sequences look to be full out melee...

...which if done well will really resonate with fans

I'd really like to see more than xwings one of these days though (even though I get it on this particular film)

One of the things I really had issue with in TFA is even though it looks as though hard times fell after the original movies, they did nothing to explain it.

Obviously there was a war after ROTJ...the cgi evidence was on the planet jakku...but no explanations.

They acknowledged a new formal government that was toothless...but didn't take 3 minutes to explain why?

The empire was pushed to the fringes (and renamed)...but they have modified versions of their old hardware and build an even bigger laser beam thing...which of course blows up after a 10 minute sequence with a trench run (how original).

Where's the fleet? Why don't the "good guys" have a pot to pee in?

Even though the original movies weren't a lesson in dramatic prose...they bothered (via crawls, sarcastic back and forth, briefings, or in 90 seconds of Alec Guinness in ROTJ that told the ENTIRE backstory that became the 7 hour cgi nightmare of the prequels better) to always cover the where? and the why?...

Abrams didn't do that...he went a little "sipho dyas" as well.

I mean...Kylo had grandpop in him and he broke up Brangelina...I get it.
Finn is different than the others and leaves the bad guys to become a leader of the good guys...I get it.

Spent 45 minutes each on those easily deciphered plotlines.

Back to Rogue One: Abrams was painted to be a big fan of Star Wars. He isn't...he's a big fan of the genre and the Hollywood money machine he's tied too. Just like george.

Hopefully, Edwards is just a straight fan and gets it...he's our best hope.

 

[andyw715]

It'll be interesting to see how the Star Wars area will look once it's completed. One thing I have thought about though is how much content will they include? Will there be things from each episode from 1-9? What if they make more movies in the future will they implement that into the area eventually or will it remain as is. I'm assuming this area will be done around the time before the 9th movie is released but who really knows when it will be opened.

I believe they already stated that the worlds in the land won't be anything in any of the movies. Kind of a catch all location.

I find that to be the ultimate cop out...

They wouldn't outright say "we want to market OUR movies"...but they also wouldnt cross the true Star Wars diehards...who are ages 40-60 and want Hoth and endor and there is very little discussion on that.

It's standard "slippery" for them trying to please everyone...which you can't do.

And by doing...risk not making the emotional tie to the parks that really take in the big time Bucks longterm

Literally - my mother and daughter were most wowed by Ollivanders in Universal. Why? B/c it was exactly like they imagined it in the book. When my daughter was picked for the ceremony and the wizard "found" her wand, it was a top 5 moment ever for her. We obviously bought the wand (win-win for Universal and us). But what strikes me about Ollivanders is it's 1. not a thrill ride, 2. completely free (no one needs to even buy the wand if they are picked), and 3. not that expensive to replicate. It just took taking the time to "get" why people loved Harry Potter. They loved the little stories and nuggets in the book. They loved the chance to BE Harry, the unassuming kid that was picked for heroism. They loved all the magic. I mean, when people mention there are only two "rides" in the new Diagon Alley land, I think they forget all that is there. There is also the Ollivanders show and another stage with different FREE and open stage shows all day that directly tie into the books (so it's 2 rides and 2+ shows for the one land). Plus the "character" meets of the Knight Bus and the Gringotts Money Exchange (where you can just walk through). And the fire-breathing dragon that operates a couple of times per hour...And Knockturn Alley, literally a secret stepping area into the Dark Arts with plenty of shopping but also plenty of free dark atmosphere and effects to walk through...this doesn't count all the wizards and wands around to cast spells and make it rain or make skeletons dance or find you your perfect robe to try on (again, and no need to buy), etc.

It is everything the books and movies were...why would it be so hard for Star Wars to do the same? We've all seen it in books and movies - let us live it...I don't want to live Disney's corporate vision of what I want. I want to live my experienced version of Star Wars!

I think it's a difference in risk.

Universal's risk was that they tried (and succeeded) in replicating the readers/viewers imagination of how things look in Harry Potter's world. The story has already been told. So Universal had a solid backdrop to build upon. They just recreated the story in exquisite detail.

On the other hand is Disney. They are inventing a new experience in Star Wars Land. There isn't a scorecard they work against to measure the how close to reality (the movies) they came to replicating part of the story.
The risk they assume is the story itself. If the backstory is weak then the land would be considered a failure by the critics.

Universal hit a home run, judged by the reaction of Potter fans, the experience stayed true to the story and made it come alive.

With Disney's rich history of story telling, I think they will do the same and one up Universal because it's a brand new story.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

I think it's a difference in risk.

Universal's risk was that they tried (and succeeded) in replicating the readers/viewers imagination of how things look in Harry Potter's world. The story has already been told. So Universal had a solid backdrop to build upon. They just recreated the story in exquisite detail.

On the other hand is Disney. They are inventing a new experience in Star Wars Land. There isn't a scorecard they work against to measure the how close to reality (the movies) they came to replicating part of the story.
The risk they assume is the story itself. If the backstory is weak then the land would be considered a failure by the critics.

Universal hit a home run, judged by the reaction of Potter fans, the experience stayed true to the story and made it come alive.

With Disney's rich history of story telling, I think they will do the same and one up Universal because it's a brand new story.

I think you give them too much credit.

I think the designs behind Star Wars land are focused on budget and the ability to repurpose or shift the "theme" to new material or revenue streams.

Swing space...in a bizarre way. Why a simulator space ride and a trackless?

Because both are cheaply updated or reprogrammed. They think Star tours works...but it never has.

Why an alien bar that's "different" than the other alien bars?

Because there's nothing to measure it to...add and subtract whatever you want...whenever you want.

Now...from an operational standpoint it's brilliant. But...remains to be seen...if creatively it works or not.

 

[Whatsthegoodword]

I think you give them too much credit.

I think the designs behind Star Wars land are focused on budget and the ability to repurpose or shift the "theme" to new material or revenue streams.

Swing space...in a bizarre way. Why a simulator space ride and a trackless?

Because both are cheaply updated or reprogrammed. They think Star tours works...but it never has.

Why an alien bar that's "different" than the other alien bars?

Because there's nothing to measure it to...add and subtract whatever you want...whenever you want.

Now...from an operational standpoint it's brilliant. But...remains to be seen...if creatively it works or not.

I don't have a problem with a trackless ride system in SW Land, in fact I'm sorta looking forward to it. It'll be a mostly new experience for guests at WDW, and that's the goal for me. How many different ride systems are there? Not that many, and there aren't too many of this type at WDW. I'm just glad that we won't get another "clam shell on a track." That would be the cop-out for me. Indeed my only disappointment in New Fantasyland is the Little Mermaid ride, for that very reason (although I acknowledge that the clamshells are the best for little kids). People heap praise on USO, but all of those rides over there are the same: a "scoop" car and YUGE screens. After the second ride you start to catch on to the pattern; by the third one you're looking for something new. So here's my point: I don't need another roller coaster. I don't need another clamshell. A trackless ride sounds great for SW Land. If that gives them the ability to tweak it easily, GREAT. Maybe when I go back to ride it for the 58th time years from now it'll be a little different. That's a good thing. All of this is why Star Tours DOES work: it's a different ride from what is the norm at WDW, and it is easy to tweak. I very much enjoy the changes they are bringing to Star Tours regularly now. It had gotten very stale before The Force Awakens.

As a Star Wars fan, my only problem with the plans as I understand them now is I'm not going to be able to walk into the "wretched hive of scum and villainy" that is Mos Eisley and it's Cantina. ALL the other "places" in the SW universe don't have the same draw to me. ...and they certainly don't have the draw that Hogwarts Castle or Diagon Alley have. That's because Star Wars is different than Harry Potter. In the HP series, the locations (especially the castle) are as much a star of show as the characters are - because of the novels. When building a "Harry Potter Land," you HAVE to build Hogwarts. Star Wars isn't driven by locations, but characters. Darth Vader is one of the best villains in cinematic history. Disney acknowledges that by bringing him back to us next weekend. Now put yourself in TWDC's shoes: what location, other than Mos Eisley, is iconic to Star Wars that will work as a theme park destination?? ... I don't think there really is one. THIS is the reason why we are seeing a nondescript location in the Galaxy Far Far Away. The fact that it will give The Mouse the ability to tweak it periodically is icing on that cake.

I trust Disney on this one. They know that they have the perfect counter to USO's Harry Potter, and they know that they have to deliver with Star Wars. I can't wait to walk around in it.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

I don't have a problem with a trackless ride system in SW Land, in fact I'm sorta looking forward to it. It'll be a mostly new experience for guests at WDW, and that's the goal for me. How many different ride systems are there? Not that many, and there aren't too many of this type at WDW. I'm just glad that we won't get another "clam shell on a track." That would be the cop-out for me. Indeed my only disappointment in New Fantasyland is the Little Mermaid ride, for that very reason (although I acknowledge that the clamshells are the best for little kids). People heap praise on USO, but all of those rides over there are the same: a "scoop" car and YUGE screens. After the second ride you start to catch on to the pattern; by the third one you're looking for something new. So here's my point: I don't need another roller coaster. I don't need another clamshell. A trackless ride sounds great for SW Land. If that gives them the ability to tweak it easily, GREAT. Maybe when I go back to ride it for the 58th time years from now it'll be a little different. That's a good thing. All of this is why Star Tours DOES work: it's a different ride from what is the norm at WDW, and it is easy to tweak. I very much enjoy the changes they are bringing to Star Tours regularly now. It had gotten very stale before The Force Awakens.

As a Star Wars fan, my only problem with the plans as I understand them now is I'm not going to be able to walk into the "wretched hive of scum and villainy" that is Mos Eisley and it's Cantina. ALL the other "places" in the SW universe don't have the same draw to me. ...and they certainly don't have the draw that Hogwarts Castle or Diagon Alley have. That's because Star Wars is different than Harry Potter. In the HP series, the locations (especially the castle) are as much a star of show as the characters are - because of the novels. When building a "Harry Potter Land," you HAVE to build Hogwarts. Star Wars isn't driven by locations, but characters. Darth Vader is one of the best villains in cinematic history. Disney acknowledges that by bringing him back to us next weekend. Now put yourself in TWDC's shoes: what location, other than Mos Eisley, is iconic to Star Wars that will work as a theme park destination?? ... I don't think there really is one. THIS is the reason why we are seeing a nondescript location in the Galaxy Far Far Away. The fact that it will give The Mouse the ability to tweak it periodically is icing on that cake.

I trust Disney on this one. They know that they have the perfect counter to USO's Harry Potter, and they know that they have to deliver with Star Wars. I can't wait to walk around in it.

I think they know that slop will sell based on the collective resolve of the consumer base right now...

But...I do like the trackless more than the other ideas.
Just rode the first - albeit simple - trackless I had the opportunity to...and I loved it. Luigis in DCA. Really a nice system to use.

The other "experiences"...dodge minivan on a stick Star tours and a modified arm simulator - we think - leaves me wonton...

We'll see.

Now we find out if that code is worth the price we paid...

 

[CuseWazowski]

Scoring highlights video! Looking forward to hearing Michael Giacchino's work!

 

[rteetz]

I don't have a problem with a trackless ride system in SW Land, in fact I'm sorta looking forward to it. It'll be a mostly new experience for guests at WDW, and that's the goal for me. How many different ride systems are there? Not that many, and there aren't too many of this type at WDW. I'm just glad that we won't get another "clam shell on a track." That would be the cop-out for me. Indeed my only disappointment in New Fantasyland is the Little Mermaid ride, for that very reason (although I acknowledge that the clamshells are the best for little kids). People heap praise on USO, but all of those rides over there are the same: a "scoop" car and YUGE screens. After the second ride you start to catch on to the pattern; by the third one you're looking for something new. So here's my point: I don't need another roller coaster. I don't need another clamshell. A trackless ride sounds great for SW Land. If that gives them the ability to tweak it easily, GREAT. Maybe when I go back to ride it for the 58th time years from now it'll be a little different. That's a good thing. All of this is why Star Tours DOES work: it's a different ride from what is the norm at WDW, and it is easy to tweak. I very much enjoy the changes they are bringing to Star Tours regularly now. It had gotten very stale before The Force Awakens.

As a Star Wars fan, my only problem with the plans as I understand them now is I'm not going to be able to walk into the "wretched hive of scum and villainy" that is Mos Eisley and it's Cantina. ALL the other "places" in the SW universe don't have the same draw to me. ...and they certainly don't have the draw that Hogwarts Castle or Diagon Alley have. That's because Star Wars is different than Harry Potter. In the HP series, the locations (especially the castle) are as much a star of show as the characters are - because of the novels. When building a "Harry Potter Land," you HAVE to build Hogwarts. Star Wars isn't driven by locations, but characters. Darth Vader is one of the best villains in cinematic history. Disney acknowledges that by bringing him back to us next weekend. Now put yourself in TWDC's shoes: what location, other than Mos Eisley, is iconic to Star Wars that will work as a theme park destination?? ... I don't think there really is one. THIS is the reason why we are seeing a nondescript location in the Galaxy Far Far Away. The fact that it will give The Mouse the ability to tweak it periodically is icing on that cake.

I trust Disney on this one. They know that they have the perfect counter to USO's Harry Potter, and they know that they have to deliver with Star Wars. I can't wait to walk around in it.

There are no trackless rides in WDW (at least true trackless, ToT is on a guide wire).

There will be a cantina it just won't have the Mos Eisley name from what I understand.

 

[Whatsthegoodword]

There are no trackless rides in WDW (at least true trackless, ToT is on a guide wire).

There will be a cantina it just won't have the Mos Eisley name from what I understand.

I didn't think there were any trackless rides there, but I wasn't sure so I didn't want to make a blanket statement. Thanks for clearing it up for me. It'll be fun to see that new technology at WDW! Yeah, I know about the upcoming SWL Cantina - I just wanted to walk into the the Mos Eisley Cantina! (...but I think I understand why I won't get to do that.)

What they ought to do, is build Mos Eisley in the World Showcase at EPCOT.

 

[HuskieJohn]

World Premier was last night (Saturday). Reactions are that it is a better movie than TFA. Kevin Smith said it was Empire good.

So it seems this movie will make hardcore Star Wars fans happy. Lets see if it makes the general public moviegoers happy.

 

[rteetz]

World Premier was last night (Saturday). Reactions are that it is a better movie than TFA. Kevin Smith said it was Empire good.

So it seems this movie will make hardcore Star Wars fans happy. Lets see if it makes the general public moviegoers happy.

Yep. Early reviews are very positive. One said that he felt the same way he did about that movie that he did coming out of the theater in 1977. This could be a huge movie for Disney.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

The rogue one reactions after the premiere are finally what they SHOULD be...

Not the 3.5-4 stars that were given to the force awakens for "feeling right"

It's the story, stupid!!!

It's all about the story...if the story is good, the characters will be loved and they'll sell massive amounts of toys...to adults.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Yep. Early reviews are very positive. One said that he felt the same way he did about that movie that he did coming out of the theater in 1977. This could be a huge movie for Disney.

Honestly...I hope it's not superfluacy...

Because if it is good I'm probably gonna walk out at 9:30 Thursday night and say "screw disney, Abrams, and Harrison ford for canning the movie last year"

...but I'll live

 

[TwoMisfits]

I wouldn't put much faith in any of the tweets - they were just as positive for Star 7.
I would tell parents that it seems the PG-13 is a REAL PG-13 and some of the horror in the movie is horrible...it is keeping me from taking my boys (who want to go)...if they aren't 10, no way do they go (yes, that's my own parental guideline for when you can watch non-language rating based, non-animated PG 13 movies...
This is not gonna be this year's family Christmas movie like Star 7 was...

 

[rteetz]

I wouldn't put much faith in any of the tweets - they were just as positive for Star 7.
I would tell parents that it seems the PG-13 is a REAL PG-13 and some of the horror in the movie is horrible...it is keeping me from taking my boys (who want to go)...if they aren't 10, no way do they go (yes, that's my own parental guideline for when you can watch non-language rating based, non-animated PG 13 movies...
This is not gonna be this year's family Christmas movie like Star 7 was...

Well I haven't heard that specifically. Star Wars movies always have some graphic elements. The force awakens did for sure, blood on a storm trooper and of course Kylo Ren and Han Solo. The tweets and early reviews are the only things we can go off of right now. Many are saying better than the force awakens which is big for the potential this movie has.

 

[TwoMisfits]

"The tone is, as promised by Lucasfilm, a war story – a relentless action tale. Fears that much-discussed reshoots were softening the story or watering down the ending appear to be unfounded, since the movie presents a much grittier soldier’s story than previous films. Think of it as Band of Brothers with a Star Wars setting, more than earning its PG-13 rating."
"Finally, Darth Vader… The Dark Lord of the Sith delivers one moment of pure horror. You could argue there’s even more than one scene that fits this description. Rogue One shows a ruthless, predatory side of Vader when he is at the height of his powers."
http://www.ew.com/article/2016/12/11/strong-non-spoiler-first-reactions-rogue-one-star-wars-story

That's from the EW puff piece...Band of Brothers is not something to take 4 and 7 year olds to...this is an age 10+ movie...

 

[lockedoutlogic]

I wouldn't put much faith in any of the tweets - they were just as positive for Star 7.
I would tell parents that it seems the PG-13 is a REAL PG-13 and some of the horror in the movie is horrible...it is keeping me from taking my boys (who want to go)...if they aren't 10, no way do they go (yes, that's my own parental guideline for when you can watch non-language rating based, non-animated PG 13 movies...
This is not gonna be this year's family Christmas movie like Star 7 was...

Though I'm tempering my expectation...because I saw rave reviews last year bout this time and they were fluffing some pillows...

The parts above are exactly...if true...the reasons this might be a real Star Wars movie that adds to the lore.

George lucas has run around for years saying "they're basically kids movies"

...BULL...that's what a guy that made bad commercialism prequels says to save face.

Star Wars sticks with you as a kid through adulthood...gen xers (now old)...appreciate mark hamill more now than ever.

I think a better quote of what Star Wars was and should be is this:

"Star Wars is a different kind of fairy tale for a generation growing up WITHOUT heroes...in a bigger, more complicated world"

I liked that guys take...
...it was george lucas, around 1990 when had decided that he would never be willing to pay to make more due to lack of technology.

He musta ran outta money or something afterwards...

 

[lockedoutlogic]

"The tone is, as promised by Lucasfilm, a war story – a relentless action tale. Fears that much-discussed reshoots were softening the story or watering down the ending appear to be unfounded, since the movie presents a much grittier soldier’s story than previous films. Think of it as Band of Brothers with a Star Wars setting, more than earning its PG-13 rating."
"Finally, Darth Vader… The Dark Lord of the Sith delivers one moment of pure horror. You could argue there’s even more than one scene that fits this description. Rogue One shows a ruthless, predatory side of Vader when he is at the height of his powers."
http://www.ew.com/article/2016/12/11/strong-non-spoiler-first-reactions-rogue-one-star-wars-story

That's from the EW puff piece...Band of Brothers is not something to take 4 and 7 year olds to...this is an age 10+ movie...

Have to disagree here...darth Vader is a known boogie man.

5 year olds? No
...7? Maybe not
...9 or 10? I'm guessing it's ok.

We'll see...I shelter mine from death, terminal illness, hatred and bigotry, the stupid thing religious zealotry causes, and the poor state of our natural world...

That's incredibly difficult to do in the current state of affairs.

...I draw the line at Disney movies where they'll do fireworks montage to it in mgm by march