The Force Awakens Star Wars VII Director? - Part 1

[flickchick85]

Oh yes. Davy Jones was worth the price of admission alone, imo.

Verbinski certainly isn't lacking for imagination (not just based on Pirates, but also Rango), which is one of the major reasons I'd support him for this.

 

[paladinryan]

If POTC 3 had been everything it could have been, then POTC 2 would be this generation's ESB. Unfortunately, POTC 3 came up very lame (Calypso, Chow Yun-Fat's waste of a character, etc...). So watch POTC 1 and 2 only, and then imagine POTC 3 and what it could have been.

 

[Project862006]

I'm with Hunter but I can see what Vile is saying. I like 'Safety Not Guaranteed' but Trevorrow has only done one feature lengthed film. Just one. If he did a bunch of indie flicks under his belt then it would be a different story. And this can apply to the likes if early Jackson, Raimi and Nolan.

Now if there were two directors who are on the same track as those three, it would be Rian Johnson and (the late bloomer) Sam Mendes. Both have proven they can handle different genres of film* they also proved they can handle action. In the case of Johnson, he did sci-fi with Looper and with Medes, he took on a huge franchise like Bond with Skyfall.

These two dudes are very diverse and fearless, and I can see them taking on Star Wars.

*Johnson: Neo-Noir, Quirky Indie Comedy, Sci-Fi action.

*Mendes: Family Drama, Gangster thriller, Relationship/60's Period drama, Quirky Indie Comdey, Big Franchise Tentpole

 

[NewYorkSpider]

Well, you've seen the best of the lot. But having seen them more as they've played ad nauseum on TV, I do think the 2nd & 3rd have quite a few scenes/sequences that make them worthwhile. They were certainly bigger and more ambitious than the 1st, but like Octoberist said - messy. The 4th? I honestly can't remember much about it, lol. I do remember it was the only one not directed by Verbinski, though.

I think Gore proved that with Part 2 and 3, he's good at world building and sheer creativity. Some of the creature designs in the Pirates sequels are flat out amazing especially when modern movie designs tend to be either too boring or derivative. It was the story that needed a lot of help.

I'll have to get ahold of the 2nd and 3rd and give them a watch. I'm not sure if they're on my Netflix.

 

[Hunter Rider]

Well, you've seen the best of the lot. But having seen them more as they've played ad nauseum on TV, I do think the 2nd & 3rd have quite a few scenes/sequences that make them worthwhile. They were certainly bigger and more ambitious than the 1st, but like Octoberist said - messy. The 4th? I honestly can't remember much about it, lol. I do remember it was the only one not directed by Verbinski, though.

I actually liked Dead Man's Chest and I think what he did with Davey Jones and the Kraken shows the potential for what he could do with a Star Wars movie. I can't recall much of the 3rd except I didn't care for it. The biggest problems the sequels had though was Sparrow IMO, I know the first movie was a hit due to the character but they really overplayed the hand in the sequels and Verbinski had to direct around that.

 

[paladinryan]

I actually liked Dead Man's Chest and I think what he did with Davey Jones and the Kraken shows the potential for what he could do with a Star Wars movie. I can't recall much of the 3rd except I didn't care for it. The biggest problems the sequels had though was Sparrow IMO, I know the first movie was a hit due to the character but they really overplayed the hand in the sequels and Verbinski had to direct around that.

That's true. If Verbinski does do SW, he needs to not let one character dominate. SW works best with ensemble.

 

[Octoberist]

Yeah or Trevorrow could end up pulling a Marc Webb. Not only does Webb feel like a puppet he's wasting his talents on Spidey instead of developing his own stuff..Oh the dangers of doing tentpoles..

 

[Octoberist]

I actually liked Dead Man's Chest and I think what he did with Davey Jones and the Kraken shows the potential for what he could do with a Star Wars movie. I can't recall much of the 3rd except I didn't care for it. The biggest problems the sequels had though was Sparrow IMO, I know the first movie was a hit due to the character but they really overplayed the hand in the sequels and Verbinski had to direct around that.

Sparrow was never meant to be the focal point of the franchise but he pulled a 'Steve Urkle' on the series. While hes fun, Jack's not a very compelling character because he comes off as incredibly apathetic and that hurts the sequels.

 

[CGHulk]

Trevorrow is out of the running.

https://***********/colintrevorrow/status/270171068415754240

 

[Octoberist]

Trevorrow is out of the running.

https://***********/colintrevorrow/status/270171068415754240

But the interesting part is how he's semi-confirming that he was approached to do it.

 

[paladinryan]

Sparrow was never meant to be the focal point of the franchise but he pulled a 'Steve Urkle' on the series. While hes fun, Jack's not a very compelling character because he comes off as incredibly apathetic and that hurts the sequels.

Very well put. SW wouldn't have worked if it centered on Han instead of Luke.

 

[Project862006]

would anyone actually want pirates films to follow orlando bloom instead?

 

[Octoberist]

would anyone actually want pirates films to follow orlando bloom instead?

Yeah. You need the straight man to the rogue which creates the wonderful 'odd couple' dynamic. I wish he was better written but at least he had an arc.

 

[Project862006]

i think audiences prefer the rogue to the straight man i believe tony stark and wolverine's popularity proved this

general audiences will always prefer rebel>boy scout

 

[Octoberist]

i think audiences prefer the rogue to the straight man i believe tony stark and wolverine's popularity proved this

general audiences will always prefer rebel>boy scout

Of course if its written well enough. Tony had a compelling arc. Mad Max did too in The Road Warrior. It doesn't have to be deep or anything.

Jack is just a very apathetic character. Thats why I hated part 4 because its basis is all on Jack. The Boy Scout is necessary evil in some cases.

 

[paladinryan]

i think audiences prefer the rogue to the straight man i believe tony stark and wolverine's popularity proved this

general audiences will always prefer rebel>boy scout

I don't know about that--Tony felt very flat to me in both IM 2 and Avengers. The character may have worn out his welcome in IM 1, to me at least.

The problem with POTC is Orlando just has no compelling arc, unlike Luke in SW.

EDIT: And the Wolverine solo movie was atrocious.

 

[Octoberist]

Well I personally liked Tony in Avengers..

 

[paladinryan]

Well I personally liked Tony in Avengers..

Movie was all about Ruffalo/The Hulk, for me.

IM works because Tony largely gives up his roguish ways, just like Han across the OT. I felt like after the catharsis of IM 1, they just ran out of ideas for his character in subsequence installments (reconciliation with the father? Okay, it's been done). I mean, I found the interaction between him and Captain America in Avengers to be obvious and shrill. Ruffalo's tortured soul (and Black Widow's for that matter) were a lot more interesting. As was Colson's sacrifice.

 

[paladinryan]

Ford is somewhat correct that Han Solo is not that complicated of a character. I mean, his overcoming selfishness and the love story with Leia basically define him.

Luke, on the other hand, has the death of his aunt and uncle, his issues with his father, his discovery of his sister, his training with Yoda, his struggle not to turn to the Dark Side, etc...

They should have done more with Bloom's character in POTC to make him the center of emotional attention like Luke. I mean, you have him grow up in the first one under Sparrow's tutelage, but that's about it. Just not very memorable of an arc.

 

[Octoberist]

Han's arc pretty much ended in 'Empire' despite being the highlight of the film along with Luke. After watching it recently, Han's role in 'Jedi' was kinda barebones.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Han's arc pretty much ended in 'Empire' despite being the highlight of the film along with Luke. After watching it recently, Han's role in 'Jedi' was kinda barebones.

I disagree. Jedi is where we see Han truly be a leader. He's the one who hatches and leads a plan to deactivate the force fields shielding e death star.

 

[flickchick85]

I actually liked Dead Man's Chest and I think what he did with Davey Jones and the Kraken shows the potential for what he could do with a Star Wars movie. I can't recall much of the 3rd except I didn't care for it. The biggest problems the sequels had though was Sparrow IMO, I know the first movie was a hit due to the character but they really overplayed the hand in the sequels and Verbinski had to direct around that.

Sparrow was never meant to be the focal point of the franchise but he pulled a 'Steve Urkle' on the series. While hes fun, Jack's not a very compelling character because he comes off as incredibly apathetic and that hurts the sequels.

Agreed. Depp created a great, memorable character in Sparrow, but he should never have become the focus of the series. He was meant to be a foil for the straight man protagonist. And if the straight man had been a remotely interesting character in any way, I don't think they would have felt the need to shift that focus to begin with. So to me, the over-emphasis on Jack was merely the symptom - the black hole of a character that was Will Turner was the real problem. Luke Skywalker wasn't the most interesting chap in the world, but at least he had earnest conviction, and the passion for a cause, which the audience could buy into and sympathize with. Will's character basically extended to "WE MUST RESCUE ELIZABETH. And my dad. BUT SERIOUSLY, ELIZABETH." Just so dull, and I think both the writing and the performance are equally to blame.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Will just wasn't interesting, and from what I remember ( I haven't watched the first pirates in 6 years and haven't watched the sequels), lot of that had to do with Orlando Bloom. His performance just wasn't interesting enough. I just wasn't captivated by his character the same way I was captivated by Luke's desires for a better life and his willingness to be a hero.

 

[Gianakin_]

See I guess I don't agree with that. I think it's a possibility (not 100% of course) that he himself would do something different because he wants to. Spielberg re-invented himself quite a few times. I'm just saying it's not some impossibility. People think Nolan has to narrow of a view on how he can direct. Maybe that's true, but I think there is more to him.

Haven't seen Lincoln yet, but every Spielberg movie screams Spielberg. Same for Nolan. I'm not talking about lack of evolution when I'm talking about him, I worship the man. But his style will always be distinct... and thusly wrong for SW. Imo.

 

[Octoberist]

Will just wasn't interesting, and from what I remember ( I haven't watched the first pirates in 6 years and haven't watched the sequels), lot of that had to do with Orlando Bloom. His performance just wasn't interesting enough. I just wasn't captivated by his character the same way I was captivated by Luke's desires for a better life and his willingness to be a hero.

It doesn't help that Orlando is very limited as an actor. Like Sam Worthington, he has to be carried by the much stronger cast. He could convey the 'average joe' vibe that Mark Hamil had as Luke.