StarDestroyer.Net BBS

http://www.avclub.com/articles/star-war ... oba,79753/

Sean O'Neal wrote:Like a DVD re-release with approximately 10 minutes of added special features, Rick McCallum continues to pop up every year or so to ask you to buy into his Star Wars TV show, based solely on a smattering of new information and the assertion that this time it will be the best thing ever. In the past, McCallum has compared the prospective series—which is set during those dark, formative years of the Empire—to The Godfather, a comparison he's made because of the many wheelings and dealings of Coruscant's "underground bosses who live there and control drugs, prostitution" and because The Godfather is really famous and respected.

Now McCallum has drawn parallels to another story of a new frontier under the thumbs of ruthless criminals, telling Den Of Geek of the show's 50 completed scripts (which he maintains they have), "These are like Deadwood in space," noting that, when it comes to actually getting them made, "Our biggest problem is that these stories are adult… [It's] so unlike anything you’ve ever associated with George [Lucas] before in relation to Star Wars. These aren't for kids." (But hopefully it will still have some of the prolonged talk of trade regulations and slaughtering of families that kids love.)

Of course, the last time McCallum was explaining why this show probably won't air for another three to five years, if at all, the reasons given were (in quick succession) that technology wasn't advanced enough, that "network television and cable television as we know it are completely imploding," and even the popularity of reality TV. So in a way, Star Wars: The TV Show already is like Deadwood, in that it's a struggle through a frustrating, lie-ridden place rife with cocksuckers.

The question is, why do people think this is McCallum saying this and not Lucas.

Lucas waited like 20 years to make the prequels because the technology wasn't there. He had to create new technology just to make the OLD fucking movies.
Cable and Network TV are imploding. The internet and complete lack of creativity are finally seeing to that.

And like Star Wars has to ride on the name recognition of the Godfather and Deadwood... fucking please. And don't give me this "respectability" bullshit either. It sounds like they are trying to say character based, not plot based for stupid people. Which not surprisingly, this guy can't figure out.

Why is it that I read these and can feel the seething hatred for a "raped childhood" oozing off the words?

I mean the crack about the slaughtering of families? We all know he is talking about Anakin killing the Tuskens, and is completely glossing over the Lars's burning corpses from 1977.

....

What makes you think he's not talking about the Lars? Your jumping to conclusions about the guy who wrote this is butthurt when your just reveling your own.

He was comparing it to those two other series because of the focus which is the criminal underbelly and adult nature, not name recognition

Ire wrote:....

What makes you think he's not talking about the Lars? Your jumping to conclusions about the guy who wrote this is butthurt when your just reveling your own.

He was comparing it to those two other series because of the focus which is the criminal underbelly, not name recognition

Oh fucking please.
Do YOU think he is talking about Owen and Beru when the previous line is "But hopefully it will still have some of the prolonged talk of trade regulations"? Give me a fucking break.

And I know what McCallum and Lucas are talking about dumbass, and why he is comparing it to the GF and DW, but O'Neal writes... "In the past, McCallum has compared the prospective series—which is set during those dark, formative years of the Empire—to The Godfather, a comparison he's made because of the many wheelings and dealings of Coruscant's "underground bosses who live there and control drugs, prostitution" and because The Godfather is really famous and respected."...
If you can't figure out what he is saying by adding that last bolded bit, well, it explains your post.

I mean did you miss the last line of his piece? Really?!

And for FUCKS SAKE, it is YOU'RE, a contraction of YOU and ARE.

Oh look, I don't really give a single molecule of a fuck

In fact even if you are right, why does it fucking matter anyways?

So you come in, say something stupid and wrong, say it badly and misspelled, get called on it and now you don't give a fuck?

Did you used to take YOUR ball home a lot?

It matters because this is a board started because of Star Wars and this is the forum where we like to talk about Star Wars, which is why Amoeba posted it, or did YOUR tiny mind miss that too?

Does Lucasfilm handle the tv production or is there another group? They just appointed a new head and wonder if that has anything to do with new development.

Havok wrote:So you come in, say something stupid and wrong, say it badly and misspelled, get called on it and now you don't give a fuck?

Did you used to take YOUR ball home a lot?

It matters because this is a board started because of Star Wars and this is the forum where we like to talk about Star Wars, which is why Amoeba posted it, or did YOUR tiny mind miss that too?

I was saying I don't give a fuck about the spelling errors I made your over reactive cunt.

And your the only one I see who's getting sand in their vagina about offhand comments about a series that isn't likely to be released for years you arrogant troglodyte

Hey, so you are stupid, have horrible spelling and grammar and like misogynistic insults to boot. Awesome. I bet your mom is proud.

You did get that I am arrogant though.

Meest wrote:Does Lucasfilm handle the tv production or is there another group? They just appointed a new head and wonder if that has anything to do with new development.

I think so. They did all the Young Indy stuff didn't they?

Would we have to wait for pre-production to know this is solid, or wait until they actually start casting before knowing it is set in stone?

Havok wrote:The question is, why do people think this is McCallum saying this and not Lucas.

Lucas waited like 20 years to make the prequels because the technology wasn't there. He had to create new technology just to make the OLD fucking movies.
Cable and Network TV are imploding. The internet and complete lack of creativity are finally seeing to that.

And like Star Wars has to ride on the name recognition of the Godfather and Deadwood... fucking please. And don't give me this "respectability" bullshit either. It sounds like they are trying to say character based, not plot based for stupid people. Which not surprisingly, this guy can't figure out.

Why is it that I read these and can feel the seething hatred for a "raped childhood" oozing off the words?

I mean the crack about the slaughtering of families? We all know he is talking about Anakin killing the Tuskens, and is completely glossing over the Lars's burning corpses from 1977.

I'm sorry that snark over Rick McCallum saying dumb things rustles your jimmies so.

The fact that you presume that it derives from some kind of special horrible grudge against Lucas for some reason, when it's the site's standard M.O. is also kind of hilarious since the idea that you have a persecution complex about Star Wars is kind of amazing to me.

Also kind of amazing in that you just kind of assert that 'Cable TV is imploding' like I'm supposed to believe it when, say, the Walking Dead right now has the highest basic cable ratings of all time (and HBO is having its best ratings since the Sopranos between Game of Thrones and True Blood), and a bunch of other cable shows like Mad Men, Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones and Homeland are all creatively ground-breaking critical hits.

You're right, calling the people at Lucasfilm including McCallum and Lucas "lie-ridden cocksuckers" totally doesn't show a negative and hateful attitude towards them at all.
Referencing things that happened in the prequels in a negative light while simultaneously ignoring the same thing happening in the OT to make a point, doesn't show any kind of bias at all.

I don't even like McCallum, but my point is he is just a mouth piece for Lucas on this subject. Unless you honestly think McCallum is the one holding up production for better technology?

And your example of 7 (nice sample size there) TV shows, none of which are on network TV, means what? And outside of Mad Men and Breaking Bad, there is nothing creatively groundbreaking about makings shows based off comic books and novels... interesting and good story telling. Creatively ground-breaking? Please.
Let us also ignore the fact that McCallum praises cable TV shows for their creativity for the sake of keeping the butthurt level up in the OP opinion piece.

And I should add this... I agree with McCallum when he says:

“Even longer. Because I think we don’t have the technology yet to be able to do it for the level of money that it would have to be done. Plus, the world of television is imploding. No one knows whether you should make a network show or a cable show. I’m really excited about it though, and I hope George does do it. I really do.”

and...

Firstly, we’ve got television as we know it about to implode. You’ve got network TV, which is really where we should be because it has the dollars to pay for this and an audience, but you’re burdened by the fact you only get 42 minutes for an hour because of commercials. And then you’ve got cable, which has the most provocative and daring programming, but has audiences of 1 or 2 million people. They also have a very limited amount of money they can spend without wanting some sort of say or control over the material, which is absolutely repugnant to us in terms of the way we work.

See because I actually knew and understood the context of what McCallum has been saying, and honestly, if you don't think TV, network and cable, are in for some major changes soon, you just aren't paying any kind of fucking attention.

But hey, they fucked up the prequels and don't make shows you want to see (even though they fucked up their last effort at Star Wars??? )fast enough, so what a bunch of lying cocksuckers right?

So I guess you don't understand the concept of reference and/or the concept of snark still eludes you. That's okay! I have a lot of socially disabled friends so I can empathize with what it's like to find a normal sense of humour frustrating and anger-inducing. Continue believing that it's the result of this O'Neal character really having it out for Lucas, it makes this so much easier for me.

I don't even like McCallum, but my point is he is just a mouth piece for Lucas on this subject. Unless you honestly think McCallum is the one holding up production for better technology?

Who cares? Either way the continual series of absurd, unbelievable new assertions, from writing 50 episodes of show without even casting it or knowing audience or critical reactions, to comparisons to seemingly arbitrary famous dark period dramas totally unlike Star Wars, is comical. We talk about McCallum because he's the one openly selling this. If Lucas or his goiter want to make other bizarre, unbelievable claims, they can feel free.

And your example of 7 (nice sample size there) TV shows, none of which are on network TV, means what? And outside of Mad Men and Breaking Bad, there is nothing creatively groundbreaking about makings shows based off comic books and novels... interesting and good story telling. Creatively ground-breaking? Please.

You're right, the success of works of other mediums adapted to television has nothing to do with a Star Wars TV show.

Anyways, his comments about Network versus Cable are actually somehow even more laughable, since cable shows have much larger budgets than their network equivalents (See: Rome, the most expensive show ever made at a $100 million dollar first season, Boardwalk Empire, with the most expensive pilot ever made at $18 million, Game of Thrones, $70 million second season)*, highly-rated programs regularly pull in around 10 million viewers, and network equivalents have much more studio oversight. And, again, you can say 'collapsing!' all you want, but some of the highest ratings ever and a critical golden age for dramas still make your claims a huge lol. And even if it was, do you and Rick think that in a few years the situation will be better?

*I think Friends' last season might have been more expensive actually, but that was the result of wild inflation in how much the cast was paid, with like everyone on the lead cast getting like a million an episode at that point or something.

Havok wrote:You're right, calling the people at Lucasfilm including McCallum and Lucas "lie-ridden cocksuckers" totally doesn't show a negative and hateful attitude towards them at all. :lol:

I read that as a reference to Deadwood, which uses that term a lot and has whores everywhere. So...

Nieztchean Uber-Amoeba wrote:So I guess you don't understand the concept of reference and/or the concept of snark still eludes you. That's okay! I have a lot of socially disabled friends so I can empathize with what it's like to find a normal sense of humour frustrating and anger-inducing. Continue believing that it's the result of this O'Neal character really having it out for Lucas, it makes this so much easier for me.

Yes, the concept of sarcasm quite clearly eludes me.

There is a difference between sarcasm, or snark if you want to keep using that term, and outright obvious dislike bordering on hatred. I don't know this O'Niel other than this opinion piece, but based on it, but this is butthurt and outright anger. You want "snark" go watch Dennis Miller do Weekend Update on old SNL episodes.

I don't even like McCallum, but my point is he is just a mouth piece for Lucas on this subject. Unless you honestly think McCallum is the one holding up production for better technology?

Who cares? Either way the continual series of absurd, unbelievable new assertions, from writing 50 episodes of show without even casting it or knowing audience or critical reactions, to comparisons to seemingly arbitrary famous dark period dramas totally unlike Star Wars, is comical. We talk about McCallum because he's the one openly selling this. If Lucas or his goiter want to make other bizarre, unbelievable claims, they can feel free.

Dude, are you saying that George Lucas doing things not the normal way is absurd? He wrote Star Wars before casting anyone. Oops. He pitched a movie before he had the technology to actually make it. Oops. He gave up almost all the money that Star Wars made at the box office to keep the rights to the movie and licensing. Oops.
You, like O'Neil, are calling McCallum and Lucas outright liars. And it's clearly McCallum going out on a soap box making these claims. I mean, it's certainly not people seeking him out to find out about on of the most anticipated TV shows on the horizon.
And has it occurred to you at all that the comparisons may be accurate? Of course not, because that is outside the realm of possibility completely because... oh yeah, lie-ridden cocksuckers.

And your example of 7 (nice sample size there) TV shows, none of which are on network TV, means what? And outside of Mad Men and Breaking Bad, there is nothing creatively groundbreaking about makings shows based off comic books and novels... interesting and good story telling. Creatively ground-breaking? Please.

You're right, the success of works of other mediums adapted to television has nothing to do with a Star Wars TV show.

Oh that is a good attempt there. It would work if your assertion were that Star Wars The TV Show is going to be good because Walking Dead was good because it transferred successfully from one medium to the other.
It wasn't.
You assertion was that these shows are "creatively ground-breaking", and that somehow these 7 examples prove that TV as we know it isn't "imploding", so since you have made that assertion, please prove it. How are these shows "creatively ground-breaking" and how are they an example of TV not being complete crap and in for drastic changes to how everything works? I mean, what does the % of 7 TV shows vs all the rest work out to?

Anyways, his comments about Network versus Cable are actually somehow even more laughable, since cable shows have much larger budgets than their network equivalents (See: Rome, the most expensive show ever made at a $100 million dollar first season, Boardwalk Empire, with the most expensive pilot ever made at $18 million, Game of Thrones, $70 million second season)*, highly-rated programs regularly pull in around 10 million viewers, and network equivalents have much more studio oversight. And, again, you can say 'collapsing!' all you want, but some of the highest ratings ever and a critical golden age for dramas still make your claims a huge lol. And even if it was, do you and Rick think that in a few years the situation will be better?

Hey, look who can't read.
He stated SPECIFICALLY that cable shows ONLY have the budget required by Lucas when they relinquish control to the people with the money, which he said is a deal breaker, but hey, why actually read what the guy said. It's way better to just make stuff up.
And again, the HANDFUL of TV shows you are citing in NO WAY represent the state of network and cable TV as a whole. How are these "golden age" dramas holding up against America Has Talent? Nice try.

JLTucker wrote:

Havok wrote:You're right, calling the people at Lucasfilm including McCallum and Lucas "lie-ridden cocksuckers" totally doesn't show a negative and hateful attitude towards them at all.

I read that as a reference to Deadwood, which uses that term a lot and has whores everywhere. So...

It is obviously a reference to Deadwood. It is used in a very derogatory manner towards Lucasfilm and McCallum to describe how this guy feels about them. It's not rocket science.

I wonder how much a coincidence it is that they just unveiled a new, "mature" game taking place in the Coruscant underworld, and that Lucas has been announcing for awhile now that he's "retiring" from SW.

I think prequel hate pretty much jumped the shark with those longer-than-the-movies reviews full of rape jokes and shit.

Havok wrote:Hey, look who can't read.
He stated SPECIFICALLY that cable shows ONLY have the budget required by Lucas when they relinquish control to the people with the money, which he said is a deal breaker, but hey, why actually read what the guy said. It's way better to just make stuff up.

I don't understand that. Lucas's production company can't raise the money for a Star Wars television show, but they could raise it for a trio of $100 million+ movies? How much were they planning to spend each season?

I do believe that the cost of the CGI might be a big issue up until recently. That shit is expensive, and the CGI visuals and costumes are part of even the low-key Star Wars moments in the later movies.

Havok wrote: And again, the HANDFUL of TV shows you are citing in NO WAY represent the state of network and cable TV as a whole. How are these "golden age" dramas holding up against America Has Talent? Nice try.

Very well, since HBO and AMC have become much more profitable on the backs of them. Ratings don't matter as much for basic cable, and matter very little at all for premium cable except insofar that HBO believes that they're representative of a show helping to keep and maintain their subscriber base. Not to mention that they can sell DVDs/BRDs/Amazon VOD/iTunes/Netflix streaming rights, while nobody ever watches a season of Reality TV again after the season ends.