Episodes VII - IX on Starwars.com???

Galvatron · Post by **Galvatron** » 2002-12-30 03:35am

Is this a joke?

http://www.starwars.com/episode-v/featu ... index.html

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2002-12-30 03:52am

Um, did you see the date?

1 April 1979.

Post by **Vympel** » 2002-12-30 06:26am

That's a classic joke

Galvatron · Post by **Galvatron** » 2002-12-30 09:27am

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:Um, did you see the date?

1 April 1979.

Yeah, I got that. It's supposed to be a primitive website that may have been up at the time of TESB's release, yadda, yadda. What gets me is Starwars.com's tacit acknowledgement that Episodes VII - IX were not figments of our imagination despite George Lucas' revisionist statements that Star Wars was "always intended" to be a six-part saga. SW.com is contradicting their master.

Post by **Vympel** » 2002-12-30 10:18am

Galvatron wrote: It's supposed to be a primitive website that may have been up at the time of TESB's release, yadda, yadda. What gets me is Starwars.com's tacit acknowledgement that Episodes VII - IX were not figments of our imagination despite George Lucas' revisionist statements that Star Wars was "always intended" to be a six-part saga. SW.com is contradicting their master.

How is it a tacit acknoweledgement that GL intended it to be 9 parts? Unfounded rumors that there would be 9 rather than 6 doesn't mean that Lucas himself intended to do nine, I'm sorry to say.

Post by **NecronLord** » 2002-12-30 10:19am

Galvatron wrote:
Spanky The Dolphin wrote:Um, did you see the date?

1 April 1979.
Yeah, I got that. It's supposed to be a primitive website that may have been up at the time of TESB's release, yadda, yadda. What gets me is Starwars.com's tacit acknowledgement that Episodes VII - IX were not figments of our imagination despite George Lucas' revisionist statements that Star Wars was "always intended" to be a six-part saga. SW.com is contradicting their master.

First of April = April fools day.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2002-12-30 10:22am

Also wasn't 7-9 just going to be what RoTJ was just longer?

Either way...yeah no 7-9...and hell Lucas reaffirmed it with saying he's too old and doesn't want someone taking the reins

Galvatron · Post by **Galvatron** » 2002-12-30 10:25am

Ghost Rider wrote:Also wasn't 7-9 just going to be what RoTJ was just longer?

Either way...yeah no 7-9...and hell Lucas reaffirmed it with saying he's too old and doesn't want someone taking the reins

He doesn't want someone else to put out a superior product, IMO.

Post by **Vympel** » 2002-12-30 10:27am

Ghost Rider wrote:Also wasn't 7-9 just going to be what RoTJ was just longer?

Either way...yeah no 7-9...and hell Lucas reaffirmed it with saying he's too old and doesn't want someone taking the reins

Three SW movies take about a decade to make. He's too old, though he has joked about it if he's still healthy/coherent by the time he's 80

For comparison- Christopher Lee is around 80 years old and can barely move. He reminds people quite matter of factly that he might die any day.

Post by **Vympel** » 2002-12-30 10:28am

Galvatron wrote: Either way...yeah no 7-9...and hell Lucas reaffirmed it with saying he's too old and doesn't want someone taking the reins

He doesn't want someone else to put out a superior product, IMO.[/quote]

Are you on some sort of incredibly anti george lucas narcotic or something? It's amazing how many people want to crucify him for "ruining" his OWN FUCKING MOVIES.

Galvatron · Post by **Galvatron** » 2002-12-30 10:36am

Vympel wrote:Are you on some sort of incredibly anti george lucas narcotic or something? It's amazing how many people want to crucify him for "ruining" his OWN FUCKING MOVIES.

His "own fucking movies" are not for his own fucking consumption. They're a product that he's selling.

Post by **Vympel** » 2002-12-30 10:40am

Galvatron wrote:His "own fucking movies" are not for his own fucking consumption. They're a product that he's selling.

Ah, so that people like his movies and pay to see them automatically means he's pushing product. Why don't you tell that to a film maker and see the response you get?

Only such a fucking moronic mentality could possibly produce the reasoning that GL doesn't want to hand over something he's poured decades of his life into because someone else could make 'superior product'

Galvatron · Post by **Galvatron** » 2002-12-30 11:54am

Vympel wrote:
Galvatron wrote:His "own fucking movies" are not for his own fucking consumption. They're a product that he's selling.
Ah, so that people like his movies and pay to see them automatically means he's pushing product. Why don't you tell that to a film maker and see the response you get?

Like Jerry Bruckheimer? Okay, let me at him!

Vympel wrote:Only such a fucking moronic mentality could possibly produce the reasoning that GL doesn't want to hand over something he's poured decades of his life into because someone else could make 'superior product'

I guess you never read about how Lucas had a fit during the filming of TESB because he thought they were ruining his movie...

Post by **Vympel** » 2002-12-30 11:57am

Galvatron wrote:Like Jerry Bruckheimer? Okay, let me at him!

No, I was thinking more along the lines of people who AREN'T hacks.

Galvatron wrote: guess you never read about how Lucas had a fit during the filming of TESB because he thought they were ruining his movie...

And this detracts from what I said ... how?

meNNis · Post by **meNNis** » 2002-12-30 12:07pm

Vympel wrote:
Galvatron wrote:Like Jerry Bruckheimer? Okay, let me at him!
No, I was thinking more along the lines of people who AREN'T hacks.

Galvatron wrote: guess you never read about how Lucas had a fit during the filming of TESB because he thought they were ruining his movie...
And this detracts from what I said ... how?

i agree with Vympel.

and stfu idiot, thats blasphemy twoards our Lord Almighty Lucas. The punishment of which is Death.

Galvatron · Post by **Galvatron** » 2002-12-30 12:11pm

meNNis wrote:and stfu idiot, thats blasphemy twoards our Lord Almighty Lucas. The punishment of which is Death.

Yeah, act like a Christian fundie. Good job.

Galvatron · Post by **Galvatron** » 2002-12-30 12:14pm

Vympel wrote:
Galvatron wrote:I guess you never read about how Lucas had a fit during the filming of TESB because he thought they were ruining his movie...
And this detracts from what I said ... how?

Forget it. Accept my concession. You win.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2002-12-30 01:31pm

I have a feeling that once Lucas is dead, the people at Lucas Films or whatever will say "Fuck his dream, this deserves another three movies." Hopefully the greed that drives ST to continue will seep into their heads for atleast another 30 years but not to the extent that they fire all the decent writirs and directors.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2002-12-30 01:35pm

And I honestly hope the fuck not.

I mean I have problems with stories and people who think "Well we can interpret the idea as good as he did."

Hopefully Star Wars movies end with Lucas because honestly the books are becoming shit and somehow I don't see something awe or grandiose for Ep 7-9.

Galvatron · Post by **Galvatron** » 2002-12-30 04:48pm

kojikun wrote:I have a feeling that once Lucas is dead, the people at Lucas Films or whatever will say "Fuck his dream, this deserves another three movies." Hopefully the greed that drives ST to continue will seep into their heads for atleast another 30 years but not to the extent that they fire all the decent writirs and directors.

Suppose they bring back Lawrence Kasdan, Irvin Kershner, and Gary Kurtz to do it. Would you trust them to continue Star Wars without Lucas?

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2002-12-30 06:03pm

kojikun wrote:I have a feeling that once Lucas is dead, the people at Lucas Films or whatever will say "Fuck his dream, this deserves another three movies." Hopefully the greed that drives ST to continue will seep into their heads for atleast another 30 years but not to the extent that they fire all the decent writirs and directors.

Ofcourse they'll hire Curtis Saxton's living brain-in-a-jar then to lead the project.

Grand Admiral Thrawn · Post by **Grand Admiral Thrawn** » 2002-12-30 06:12pm

AH! REAL BAD THOUGHTS! What if B&B took over after Lucas?

AH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Post by **Vympel** » 2002-12-30 10:55pm

Galvatron wrote:Suppose they bring back Lawrence Kasdan, Irvin Kershner, and Gary Kurtz to do it. Would you trust them to continue Star Wars without Lucas?

No. Because they're Lucas' subordinates- they operated under his authority, and his vision of what his movies should be. If those guys want to make good sci fi, by all means they should go ahead and make their own sci-fi movie series, but don't cash in on SW after it's creator is dead and gone- they'd be merely standing on the shoulders of someone else's work.

Forget it. Accept my concession. You win.

Don't know why you're rolling your eyes but yeah you were wrong.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2002-12-31 12:02am

Galvatron wrote:Suppose they bring back Lawrence Kasdan, Irvin Kershner, and Gary Kurtz to do it.

Pardon for this semi-off topic question, but isn't one of those guys dead?

Galvatron · Post by **Galvatron** » 2002-12-31 12:07am

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:
Galvatron wrote:Suppose they bring back Lawrence Kasdan, Irvin Kershner, and Gary Kurtz to do it.
Pardon for this semi-off topic question, but isn't one of those guys dead?

Nope. In fact, Kurtz and Kasdan both have new movies coming up. Kershner hasn't directed since '93, but he's still alive.