Star Wars Episode 7 to be directed by......

[Mental Maden]

JJ Abrams.  Hmmmm, interesting.  Will this bring Trek and Wars fans together or further fuel the fires of nerd rivalry?

http://www.thewrap.com/movies/article/jj-abrams-set-direct-next-star-wars-film-exclusive-74596

[TimtheEnchanter]

I disliked his first Star Trek enough that I'm not even interested in the second one. Though I don't know if the problem there was really his direction or the script, which I wouldn't have liked no matter who was directing. And his film history as a director is so short that it's pretty hard to give a good appraisal of his capabilities. The film just seemed like a generic action flick to me though and didn't feel like Star Trek at all. And the only moment that really stuck out in my mind was, "Damn, they actually remembered that Sulu is an accomplished fencer."

[golemjoe]

I disliked his first Star Trek enough that I'm not even interested in the second one. Though I don't know if the problem there was really his direction or the script, which I wouldn't have liked no matter who was directing. And his film history as a director is so short that it's pretty hard to give a good appraisal of his capabilities. The film just seemed like a generic action flick to me though and didn't feel like Star Trek at all. And the only moment that really stuck out in my mind was, "Damn, they actually remembered that Sulu is an accomplished fencer."

I didn't care for the fact that they did the whole parallel universe thing, rather than try to work with what they had developed previously (yes yes I know it was decades worth of material that they had to stay within the lines of..).  It worked but it was a cheap way out IMO and greatly diminished the enjoyment I got out of watching.  "What .. blow up Vulcan?!?  When was that?!?"

So no, I don't get the feeling that Abrams was a real hardcore fan.. at least from that movie.  Would he do something similar to Star Wars?  I guess we'll see..

[TimtheEnchanter]

"What .. blow up Vulcan?!?  When was that?!?"

The destruction of Vulcan is a perfect example of the "cater to the lowest common denominator" crap that entertainment is becoming more and more famous for. Of all the things that a time traveler could screw up in the Trek universe, there is literally NOTHING that they could do that would make the characters more appealing to an impulsive "cave-man" audience. Vulcans first made contact with humans in a feudal post WWIII wasteland full of rivaling factions. And though humans still maintain a lot of their emotional drives in the future centuries, it's Vulcan philosophy that helps the humans get past their petty differences and work towards a better tomorrow. Eliminate that, and you eliminate the one critical moment in Star Trek history that made human civilization "better" than it is now. And instead, humanity ventures out into the interstellar neighborhood without a mentoring race who has been down that same self-destructive war-like path ages ago.

[FatherXmas]

Boy, there's an awful amount of lens flair post Empire.  Poor quality control I tell ya!  Once you remove the threat of disintegration, the workers just slack off.

[TimtheEnchanter]

Taking this one with a grain of salt, but...

http://eldeforma.com/2012/10/30/disney-compra-lucas-films-y-firma-contrato-con-justin-bieber-para-ser-el-proximo-luke-skywalker/

[Lothic]

So no, I don't get the feeling that Abrams was a real hardcore fan.. at least from that movie.  Would he do something similar to Star Wars?  I guess we'll see..

I've seen interviews with Abrams where he directly admitted he was always a long-time Star Wars fan who barely even liked or knew anything about Star Trek before he got involved with it.  According to him much of the creative vision that he applied towards Star Trek was to make it as Star Wars-y as he thought he could get away with.  I guess we have to take his word on that - at the very least it could explain why he thought he had to blow up a peaceful planet with a make-shift Romulan Death Star.

Star Trek was for Abrams simply a high-profile Hollywood project that obviously helped his career along but was never something he was truly passionate about.  In fact given the circumstances one could almost say that he used Star Trek as a stepping-stone towards his ultimate goal of being considered worthy to helm a new Star Wars movie.  I hope he's up to that challenge and for our sakes perhaps he'll become so busy with Star Wars that Star Trek will be handed off to someone else who actually has a clue about how Star Trek works.  For what it's worth I actually like both Star Wars and Star Trek, but I like them for different reasons and I didn't really care for Abrams' ham-fisted attempt to make one of them too much like the other.

[TimtheEnchanter]

I hope he's up to that challenge and for our sakes perhaps he'll become so busy with Star Wars that Star Trek will be handed off to someone else who actually has a clue about how Star Trek works.

Unfortunately, in order to do that, Paramount will have to do something that I don't think they've EVER had to do with Star Trek before, which is to completely drop a project from CANON. Pretend the reboot never happened.

[houtex]

Oh, pshaw.  As if Star Trek in TOS, TAS, TNG, DS9, VOY or ENT was going all 'canon' in the first place.   TOS set the canon and even they called Starfleet and the United Federation of Planets different things in the first few episodes.

It's entertainment.  I liked ST:2009.  A lot.  Thought they did a pretty fun job of it.  And I'm a pretty addicted Trekkie myself.  The people, besides Abrams, that did that are still available TO DO THAT again, and I bet Paramount just... lets that happen, and picks one of the others to direct it.  I, for one, hope they pick one who's not so fond of the flares...

However.  Trek, to me, was *never* meant to be movies, but a series on the tube.  Movies are *supposed* to be bombastic for a couple of hours... series can do that one or two in the show, but then deal with the characters, canon, etc, ad nausem.

This is why ST:2009 is a fun ride... but as a series show, it of course sucked because it went against all canon... but then, they were completely destroying, a la Back to the Future II, the 'canon timeline', and you just have to throw all that out from the moment Nero's ship shows up and blows the hell outta the Kelvin...

There is just ONE thing that bugs me about the 2009 movie and that is this:  George Samuel "Sam" Kirk.  What happened to Kirk's older brother? http://www.startrek.com/database_article/george-samuel-kirk

Where was he when Winona was on the Kelvin with George?  Back home?  This is not explained, and that, friends, THAT bugs the HELL outta me... Of course, he could have been just back home with the grandparents... but then why would *Winona* be on the Kelvin, pregnant, in the first dang place?!
 
And another thing.  Since when did Orion girls get to be Starfleet Cadets in Kirk's time?  I'm betting that's retro'd as something to do with the Klingons gettin' hold of Nero's ship and beatin' the hell outta the Orions or something, and so they scattered... and there a green chick goes, to Starfleet Academy?!

Huh.  I hate ST:2009 now.  Hell yeah, I agree.  Abrams sucks, frack his flares, and that movie sucks.  ST:ID will suck a black hole's worth, and Star Wars 7, 8 and 9 will suck so much MORE THAN ANYTHING GEORGE LUCAS DID TO 1-3, the UNIVERSE will IMPLODE.

You heard it here first, watch.
 
---
 
I am a sarcastic leaf on the wind.  Watch how I soar.  I'm sure Fanboi Abrams will make SW 7/8/9 into awesome spectacles worthy of Lord of the Rings/Titanic type accolades and such.  Maybe even a best picture Oscar for the 8th and 9th, and they *sweep* every major award in one of their years.  Or not.  Time will tell.
 
---
 
As far as blowing up Vulcan... yeah, well... Nero was nutz, see the BTTF:II thing, and voila, it works.
 
Vulcans *were not needed* by the time that happened.  That is not to belittle their importance, but it is to say a thing that is a truth: The argument about Vulcans being a steering factor was true... in the past.  In ST:2009, the establishment of 'how things are meant to be' in the Federation and Starfleet is now a set of rules, and Vulcan's influence is heavily diluted due to the Andorian, Tellurite, and of course Human, among quite a few other species, being involved in the state of affairs.  And there will be Vulcans, they are going to a colony world... it just won't be Vulcan, the planet.  They'll still have a voice.  And that voice will be as strong, because Sarek and a few others will still be there, helping to guide the Federation along it's new path, as yet undetermined...
 
The ongoing mission will still go on.  Just took a left is all.
 
/I, for one, am SO looking forward to Star Trek Into Darkness... Hurry up, May 17th, 2013!

[Tenzhi]

I, for one, hope they pick one who's not so fond of the flares...

I didn't notice the flares while I was watching the movie.  Then after I saw it I saw everyone complaining about it.  Then I saw a documentary on the making of it and they showed them putting together a shot of (IIRC) the Enterprise and I got to see the shot with and without the flares and I said to myself "to heck with everyone complaining about the flares".

I'm looking out the window at a parking lot on a cold night and nearly every car is catching the light to glint, and the street lights are starbursting.  Light reflects and scatters in interesting ways, it's not just a tool for flat illumination.

[Cobra Man]

[Nos482]

[eabrace]

Sounds like talks have started with Hamil, Fisher, and Ford about potentially reprising their roles in Episode VII.

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2013/02/21/mark-hamill-star-wars-episode-vii/

I've always assumed that Hamil would be the easy sell if this ever came up.  I'd always thought that Ford would be a little harder to convince, but after The Crystal Skull I think I might be wrong about that.  Fisher, on the other hand, is likely to be very hard to convince.  If they do manage to land her, I think it would be safe to say that the film is going to be fairly well done.

[houtex]

I would think that it is something they'll live without... I mean, frankly, while it'd be nifty to see Luke and Han and Leia, and Chewie, don't forget Peter Mayhew now, back in their roles... they're minor importance, I'd think, except in jump starting the third trilogy, and their kids/coworkers/etc, ad nausem is going to be the story carriers.  What do THEY do in this new set of stories?

If they rely upon Luke and Han (I'd suspect that'd be what some would want) I don't think they'd get as good a story.  It's time for them to be mentors to the new crew of kids.

My take, but there it is.

[Lothic]

It's time for them to be mentors to the new crew of kids.

It's pretty clear that if -any- of the original Star Wars actors show up in these new movies it'll be as much older mentor-type appearances akin to what we saw Leonard Nimoy play in the last Star Trek movie.  I wouldn't expect to see Hamill, Ford and/or Fisher appear on screen more than few minutes tops because as you say these new movies are going to be all about the "next generation" of characters whoever they turn out to be.

But I do think the idea of the original actors potentially coming back to make cameo appearances as their own older versions is particularly prophetic considering that they've been talking about doing that for 30+ years now.  I distinctly remember (as far back as the early 1980s) Lucas outlining his "grand plan" to not only eventually make an Ep. 7, 8 and 9 but to have Hamill reprise his role as a 50-60 year old Skywalker when Hamill himself would actually be 50-60 years old.  Sure the details have changed a bit since then (i.e. Lucas selling Star Wars to Disney) but the idea that Old Hamill might finally appear as Old Luke is something I've been waiting decades for.

[Shenku]

*Looks at Cobra Man's post*



>_>;

[TimtheEnchanter]

I've always assumed that Hamil would be the easy sell if this ever came up.  I'd always thought that Ford would be a little harder to convince, but after The Crystal Skull I think I might be wrong about that.  Fisher, on the other hand, is likely to be very hard to convince.  If they do manage to land her, I think it would be safe to say that the film is going to be fairly well done.

I'm not sure where this film is supposed to be going. Is Disney throwing out the 'official' storyline with the New Jedi Order and making their own? From what I remember, the NJO was rather Luke-centric (since he founded the thing), and didn't start long after RotJ. So, Luke shouldn't look much older.

[eabrace]

I'm not sure where this film is supposed to be going. Is Disney throwing out the 'official' storyline with the New Jedi Order and making their own? From what I remember, the NJO was rather Luke-centric (since he founded the thing), and didn't start long after RotJ. So, Luke shouldn't look much older.

Even if they aren't throwing out that storyline, is it possible that they're picking up some time after the new order has been established?

[fdbryant3]

I will be very surprised if they use anything from the expanded universe except by coincidence (such as Han and Leia get married and have kids - who might be named after EU counterparts).  Otherwise I think the post-ROTJ EU as it exist now is going to be scrapped and future books and other media will conform to what happens in the movies.

BTW, NJO happens 21 years after RotJ.

[houtex]

Well, wait... that's... an interesting take on things.

I would have sworn that a lot of the books are actually considered canon.  As such, the movies should just reflect that, I would think.

Unless JJ pulls out a time travel device plot that screws that up in the same way as ST:2009 and BTTF... the books then become invalid as canon if they don't. Unlike the shows and movies of Trek, which are still valid, but just a different timeline, which opens up all new avenues of exploration of Trek... supposedly.

But if those books become non-canon because they wanna make more movies?  What will the fans do...?
 
I smell revolt.  Smells like... well, I dunno.  Hm.

/Probably smells revolting, come to think about it...

[TimtheEnchanter]

AFAIK the EU books have always been considered as non-CANON. And rightfully so, because in a lot of cases, they don't pay much attention to the necessary details. There are numerous moments where the books contradict the films, or things in other books. Though there's an official "Holocron" of CANON information that authors have access to, still a lot of things slip through, and I don't think there's anyone at Lucas who reads through these books before publication to make sure everything is as it should be.

As for a fan rebellion... I think the odds of that are pretty slim. I always thought Star Trek fans were even more vigilant than Star Wars ones, and the Abrams film didn't take nearly as much flak as I expected it to. Seems most just complain about the lens flares rather than the plot, or the way it seems to defaecate on the source material. Same is true for Star Wars Episode 1. Very few complain about the overall story. They just don't like how the film was made, and would prefer that Jar Jar and Jake Lloyd could somehow be erased from collective memory.

[Lothic]

As for a fan rebellion... I think the odds of that are pretty slim. I always thought Star Trek fans were even more vigilant than Star Wars ones, and the Abrams film didn't take nearly as much flak as I expected it to. Seems most just complain about the lens flares rather than the plot, or the way it seems to defaecate on the source material. Same is true for Star Wars Episode 1. Very few complain about the overall story. They just don't like how the film was made, and would prefer that Jar Jar and Jake Lloyd could somehow be erased from collective memory.

I think if Abrams' stab at Star Trek can give us any clues as to how he'll handle Star Wars it be that he'll end up creating relatively entertaining movies that'll have very little if anything to do with any Star Wars canon that's been established by any post-RotJ book series.  That's a bet I'd be willing to make any day of the week...

As fdbryant2 implied there might be bits and pieces that get incorporated by coincidence, but we'll never get (for good or bad) movies based strictly on currently existing Star Wars books.  Abrams will simply not be able to resist putting his own spin on this and thus will never feel compelled to follow any pre-existing "playbook" story-wise. We will all need to come to grips with that and be willing to see if these movies end up being entertaining in their OWN right.

[houtex]

I just read through this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars_canon

Very interesting how that all works.  So yeah, not canon, per se.  Very guidelined, but not canon.

And what you said, Lothic, is what applied to ST:2009 for me, and frankly, any movie/TV show:  It is what it is.  Enjoy it if possible.

/I liked Speed Racer.  I did.  I can't help it.  I know it was bad.  Just like ST:TUC was bad.  And I liked it too.
//I'm an oddity, wrapped in question, surrouned by enigma.  Y'all love me for it too.

[fdbryant3]

[Lothic]

When the new movie comes out I predict their will be an overblown disturbance on the Internet as if many Geeks cried out and suddenly.............well bitching, bitching, bitching and never silenced.

I tend to think about Star Wars canon in terms of the trials and tribulations of what's happened to Star Trek.  I'm not trying to compare the Star Wars and Star Trek story universes here, only pointing out that in terms of overall quantity of "source material" Star Wars is finally catching up to the mess that Star Trek has been dealing with over the decades.

Let's put what I'm talking about into perspective.  While it's nice that people have created at least five distinct canon levels for Star Wars you could really just simplify it down to two for both franchises: 1) stuff that's been in the movies/TV and 2) stuff that hasn't.  For the sake of argument I'm not going to worry about things like the books, comics or games because each franchise has its own secondary collection of what I'd call "level 2 offline" material.  When you break it down with my two level system Star Wars currently only has 6 movies (all strongly guided by one man, Lucas) and an animated TV show.  That's it.  Star Trek on the other hand currently lumbers under 6 TV series (counting TAS) and 11 movies which were based on the creative visions of many different people.  Simply put Star Trek's canon is a mess because it has a huge umbrella of material with which to be messy with.

It'll be interesting in the years to come to see how Star Wars will handle the influx of new material being produced by new people.  As you imply I suspect when more material sees the light of day it'll become harder and harder for people to agree on what's strictly canon and what isn't.  Star Trek had to figure out how to survive in a post-Roddenberry world - so too will Star Wars have to find its way in a post-Lucas world.

[eabrace]

When you break it down with my two level system Star Wars currently only has 6 movies (all strongly guided by one man, Lucas) and an animated TV show.

Don't forget the ChristmasLife Day special!

I wonder if the old Droids cartoon from the 80s counts, too.

And the Ewoks had their own animated series and two live-action made-for-TV movies.

And there was also the 2003 Clone Wars miniseries that led directly into the opening minutes of Revenge of the Sith.

[Corlagon]

Those are all considered Expanded Universe, i.e. C-canon. (Life Day might even be N-canon, George Lucas hates it).

As completely abandoning decades of continuity would cause a major outrage, I'd expect them to simply create another level of canon and say there are two continuities now. They wouldn't necessarily continue with the old one, though.

[Lothic]

Don't forget the ChristmasLife Day special!

I wonder if the old Droids cartoon from the 80s counts, too.

And the Ewoks had their own animated series and two live-action made-for-TV movies.

And there was also the 2003 Clone Wars miniseries that led directly into the opening minutes of Revenge of the Sith.

I didn't actually "forget" about those but I did do my best to try to pretend they didn't exist by not mentioning them.  In any event there's always a few minor embarrassing exceptions to prove the rule.  For what it's worth I don't count Galaxy Quest as part of Star Trek canon either.

Those are all considered Expanded Universe, i.e. C-canon. (Life Day might even be N-canon, George Lucas hates it).

As completely abandoning decades of continuity would cause a major outrage, I'd expect them to simply create another level of canon and say there are two continuities now. They wouldn't necessarily continue with the old one, though.

Frankly the concept of having all those "levels" of canon for Star Wars is somewhat laughable to me.  As you say I fully expect people to desperately try to come up with new X, Y and Z-canons to keep it all under control.  It reminds me of the religious schisms that finally broke up Christianity into all the protestant denominations we have today.  People need to get over categorizing things based on Saint George's whims because he's no longer head of the Star Wars church.

Hopefully as new Star Wars material gets churned out people will begin to see the futility of being too anal about it all.  Being able to pigeon-hole everything was a luxury people had when there was a relatively small amount of material to consider.  Eventually they'll run out of letters of the alphabet if you know what I mean...