MovieChat Forums > Rocksteady > Replies
Rocksteady's Replies
They aged Christopher Lloyd for the 1985 Doc. When we see him in 1955, he looks just as he would normally. This worked out well since we only see him in 1985 briefly.
Then in the sequel, when he goes to 2015, he gets a treatment to de-age him. This way, his 1985 version doesn't need to have the makeup to make him look older.
Exactly
I agree with you. I've always said the same thing every time someone mentions that he's irrelevant.
Yeah, everyone died, but there is a good chance that the Nazis would get a hold of the ark again and study it more. Or maybe they had someone as knowledgeable as indy waiting to look it over. Then they would use the power correctly.
While indy did nothing to stop the nazis himself, he was the one who ultimately brought the ark back home. Everything he did in the movie made him able to be in position to take possession of the ark eventually.
I replied before about Lord of the Rings, then I found this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JM1GyLLmx-E
this guy explains the inconsistency and even used the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings as examples about how to and how not to plan a trilogy.
Thought it was interesting
sorry if this was already posted before on the boards
Haha, that's a lot of assuming. Good luck with the rest of your theories on here.
You like to bring up fanboys, which is odd since there is nothing fanboyish about wanting consistent storytelling.
But you're saying that people can't be creative unless they are given free reign. I'm saying that isn't necessarily the case. Lord of the Rings and Game of Thrones are very successful franchises that are bounded by an established narrative. There was still some creativity within both.
And, it's not necessarily a directors fault but mainly Disney. JJ Abrams is back again, so he's doing 2 of 3 movies. He should have been given all three or not given them at all. From the beginning they should have hired someone willing to take on all three films to keep it consistent. They said they wanted a trilogy of films but they didn't provide any direction. We will see what JJ does in 9,but it's a little strange to build something in 7,have it altered in 8 by someone else.
So you need someone who is completely established? I don't think so. But then, to that argument, why was Johnson used? He made a couple of mediocre movies and then was responsible for the biggest franchise.
And you are telling me there is no one creative enough that is willing to helm 3 movies? Or at least write them? Peter Jackson did so with The Lord of the Rings just fine. Wasn't his story, but I guess he adapted them well enough. I don't like those movies but apparently many people did.
It had been referred to as a sequel trilogy numerous times, plus based on previous experience, it would make sense.
And there doesn't seem to be a story arc. Rian Johnson said a few times that he rewrote the script and changed established elements. Episode 7 was essentially a reboot of star wars. It continued the story but set up much more for future installments. Episode 8 took many things from 7 and made them irrelevant. Knights of Ren, Snoke, Rey's past, and made the quest for Luke to have a much smaller meaning. He essentially rebooted the reboot. That doesn't sound like having an outline to me.
For the main saga, I rather have a set structure. Outside of that, do whatever you want.
Well, Lucas had no trouble getting two more directors to do Empire and Jedi after Star Wars was considered to be one of the biggest movies of all time
Exactly. A plot outline should have existed. Writers can be creative within the outline, sort of like Game of Thrones. Follows a set outline but there are creative differences for better or worse. If you want total creative freedom, then spin offs are where to do it.
Yep. I love it when people say that Lucas didn't plan his trilogy either. Well, he may not have had a fully fleshed out story, but at least his mind was a little consistent between episodes 4-6 rather than have another writer come in and just change what he initially set up. Disney should have taken better care with the franchise and outlined a trilogy before starting episode 7. Star wars has become too big of a franchise to just let the story develop haphazardly.
I replied above, but just to you now, while it may be that he was going to end up alone, fans are more upset with how he got there than him being there. The weren't this upset at TFA and were expecting him to be secluded in the new film, but they wanted a better explanation.
Edit :I think you kind of said as much in a previous post. But this is what I was getting at. And Lucas could have come up with a hundred things and this was one variant he came up with. Just saying the end result was the same as a Lucas vision, but getting there could be drastically different.
Yes but how he got there and his actual feelings might have been totally different. It's fine for him to be on his own but many fans were upset with why he was alone. It is not as if they saw TFA and were anticipating something else. They didn't like how he got to this stage. And as I said, we don't know how Lucas even envisioned this either.
I know that it is true, what I am saying is that we don't know how much is so similar. From what I gathered, the similarity is that Luke secludes himself and maybe had second guesses, but that's about it.
But yes, regardless of the writer, it would have generated backlash on midichlorian type levels.
Do we know how much of that is really true? Lucas is known to say contradictory things.
Even if it is the case, we don't exactly know the plan Lucas had other than Luke being reluctant to join the fight. Also, Lucas seemed to be out of touch even with his own style. I don't mind the prequels at much as others, but there is no denying that some of his choices were strange and didn't make sense when all of his 6 episodes are combined.
Even if Lucas wrote it the same way, you would still have the backlash from fans just like when the prequels were released. This isn't even a major gripe I had with the movie,my problem was with overall tone, but I still rather have seen a different Luke...but I'm fine with his new direction.
Apparently the bombing run was done with bombs that have some sort of propellant. Wasn't explained in the movie but from what I hear maybe in a book tie in our something. But from what we saw in the movie, it didn't make sense.
I actually liked Rey in TFA, but I do have a problem with her in TLJ.
The whole Luke being a Gary Stu is not exactly correct in my vision of the story. In the original trilogy we do find out early on that Luke is the son of a Jedi. The jedi are strong with the force which seems to hold a religious and mystic quality which is strong in his family. I see Luke as the offspring of the supposed greatest force user, therefore, he is also a great force user.
During TFA, from what is hinted at, Rey may have had training as a jedi, or even better, is the offspring of a jedi. I liked this idea and my mind didn't deviate from expecting this in the future installments.
Then in TLJ, Kylo says her parents are nobodies and she hasn't had training since Luke doesn't seem to know her. This goes against my and I assume other people's vision of Luke and Rey'abilities. I just don't like it.
I hope that JJ Abrams can "fix" this aspect of TLJ, maybe Kylo is lying.
This is just one of many issues I had with TLJ and probably the most minor one cause I'm still holding out hope for a better interpretation in IX.
The short with Sapper is 2048,so he wouldn't have aged much between the short and the film.
This doesn't confirm that they don't age, it is still possible that they stay the same.
The intro says that a mutiny of nexus 6 was the reason for the creation of the blade runners. It's exposition to a character who should already know since his job only existed because of them