News Bob Iger is back! Chapek is out!!

sedati

Well-Known Member
Is it? I was under the impression that they began discussing a halt to theatrical productions after Solo bombed, and solidified the decision when Last Jedi underperformed.
No, it was discussed when the initial timeframe was laid out. If I have time later I'll find a quote from Iger.
 

Nubs70

Well-Known Member
I think what many people -- including Disney leadership -- have overlooked is that part of what made Star Wars films so successful was the scarcity. Until Disney bought Lucasfilm, there were a grand total of only six films in the series and the two trilogies were 20 years apart. Sure, there were some TV shows and tons of tie-in books and merchandise, but there were only six actual films. That made the release of each film an event. Start churning films out every year and it becomes less special, less anticipated.
If you treat the storyline as a live action remake of a previous installment, all the investment needed is dialouge and scenery.

Then you can churn out yearly installments until the buzz wears off but you have harvested billions in today's dollars.
 

pdude81

Well-Known Member
Now I get why the picture was posted. I didn't know what this was until I walked past it an hour ago. D'Amaro and Iger signs currently up
 
Last edited by a moderator:

JD80

Well-Known Member
If you didn't want to risk creating a new Star Wars story for the new movies all you had to do was get a competent writer and director and adapt the Thrawn trilogy.

That was basically risk-free. You had a built in story that almost all fans loved or at least knew something about. You had a story that had a beginning, middle and end that were competently put together and made sense. You had to be creative with it to adapt the time difference and the inclusion of the OT characters (if you were going to use them), but the plotpoints were there.

Why they didn't do that, who knows. Books did sell 15M copies and they used that character in Rebels.

Now they're going to shoe horn his story in some god awful plot on D+. Feloni is great at creating characters in a cartoon show that we have to conveniently have to forget about when we watch movies.
 

Casper Gutman

Well-Known Member
If you didn't want to risk creating a new Star Wars story for the new movies all you had to do was get a competent writer and director and adapt the Thrawn trilogy.

That was basically risk-free. You had a built in story that almost all fans loved or at least knew something about. You had a story that had a beginning, middle and end that were competently put together and made sense. You had to be creative with it to adapt the time difference and the inclusion of the OT characters (if you were going to use them), but the plotpoints were there.

Why they didn't do that, who knows. Books did sell 15M copies and they used that character in Rebels.

Now they're going to shoe horn his story in some god awful plot on D+. Feloni is great at creating characters in a cartoon show that we have to conveniently have to forget about when we watch movies.
Lucas said he never read any of the EU novels and they took place in a completely different world then the films. In the prequels he ignored the EU when it was convenient and his sequel trilogy plans would have completely obliterated the EU, just as Disney eventually did. It's great if fans like EU material - I love the Old Republic RPGs, for instance - but the notion that it ever had any real hold on canon status was nuts. That's good, because you can go through the EU and find tons of terrible ideas that make the PT and ST look like Shakespeare. You don't get this odd fan outrage when, say, Star Trek films or TV shows contradict Star Wars novels or the latest Predator or Ghostbusters or Alien film ignores storylines from ancillary media products.
 

Casper Gutman

Well-Known Member
Taking down Bob's sign seems a bit low, actually. Has anyone else's "window on Main Street" type acknowledgement ever been removed because someone fell out of favor with the current regime? It really feels like they're very disingenuously trying to rewrite history and hide the fact that Iger hand-picked Chapek and every single thing Chapek did was a continuation of Iger's policies.
 

JoeCamel

Well-Known Member
Taking down Bob's sign seems a bit low, actually. Has anyone else's "window on Main Street" type acknowledgement ever been removed because someone fell out of favor with the current regime? It really feels like they're very disingenuously trying to rewrite history and hide the fact that Iger hand-picked Chapek and every single thing Chapek did was a continuation of Iger's policies.
This is the same guy who pshopped Staggs out of a groundbreaking he attended......
 

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
If you didn't want to risk creating a new Star Wars story for the new movies all you had to do was get a competent writer and director and adapt the Thrawn trilogy.

That was basically risk-free. You had a built in story that almost all fans loved or at least knew something about. You had a story that had a beginning, middle and end that were competently put together and made sense. You had to be creative with it to adapt the time difference and the inclusion of the OT characters (if you were going to use them), but the plotpoints were there.

Why they didn't do that, who knows. Books did sell 15M copies and they used that character in Rebels.

Now they're going to shoe horn his story in some god awful plot on D+. Feloni is great at creating characters in a cartoon show that we have to conveniently have to forget about when we watch movies.

The Thrawn trilogy was very good and easily the best part of the old EU (which had some excellent stuff scattered about, but was also frequently terrible) -- and much better than the sequel trilogy -- but trying to adapt it into a new movie trilogy wouldn't work at this point.

If you take out the OT characters, you're essentially creating a new story entirely. It's no longer even remotely similar to the Thrawn trilogy because they were integral to nearly everything that happens; you can't just sub them out with different characters and have the story work as-is.

If you don't take them out, you still have to massively overhaul the story because it doesn't work with them in their 50s and 60s (or older). The longer time skip would cause other problems like the plot making less sense 25-30 years after ROTJ instead of 5, and also causes issues for characters like Mara Jade. Plus, some of the plot points were essentially eliminated by the prequel trilogy.
 

JD80

Well-Known Member
The Thrawn trilogy was very good and easily the best part of the old EU (which had some excellent stuff scattered about, but was also frequently terrible) -- and much better than the sequel trilogy -- but trying to adapt it into a new movie trilogy wouldn't work at this point.

If you take out the OT characters, you're essentially creating a new story entirely. It's no longer even remotely similar to the Thrawn trilogy because they were integral to nearly everything that happens; you can't just sub them out with different characters and have the story work as-is.

If you don't take them out, you still have to massively overhaul the story because it doesn't work with them in their 50s and 60s (or older). The longer time skip would cause other problems like the plot making less sense 25-30 years after ROTJ instead of 5, and also causes issues for characters like Mara Jade. Plus, some of the plot points were essentially eliminated by the prequel trilogy.

I'm sure you can find someone creative to make it work.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Taking down Bob's sign seems a bit low, actually. Has anyone else's "window on Main Street" type acknowledgement ever been removed because someone fell out of favor with the current regime? It really feels like they're very disingenuously trying to rewrite history and hide the fact that Iger hand-picked Chapek and every single thing Chapek did was a continuation of Iger's policies.
My uncertain recollection is that this specific sign used to say Robert Iger and was changed when Chapek became CEO.
 

AndyS2992

Well-Known Member
My uncertain recollection is that this specific sign used to say Robert Iger and was changed when Chapek became CEO.
Nah, he had his own sign

a6e8wfmxfjb81.png
 

JoeCamel

Well-Known Member
' uncertain recollection is that this specific sign used to say Robert Iger and was changed when Chapek became CEO.
"As you get off the ship, on the left side you can see a sign proclaiming: "Captain Bob Iger. Shrimp Distributors. Quality. Reliability. Key West. Willow Bay." Iger, of course, is the chairman and CEO of the Walt Disney Company. On the right hand side is the Pump House with lettering stating: "Bob Chapek. Master Ship Builder." Chapek is chairman of Disney Parks, Experiences and Products and some people suspect he may become the next CEO after Iger."

 

HauntedPirate

Park nostalgist
Premium Member
Chapek’s sign was there in January 2017, which is when I photographed my opinion of it, and him. My dislike for him was not and is not a recent thing. Don’t like it? Skip my post. Childish? If that’s your opinion, so be it, I’m not losing a wink of sleep over it. I call it disagreeing vehemently with someone’s actions of cutting costs and increasing prices with the sole goal of boosting quarterly profits (for starters) and showing my disagreement. Josh now has a sign on the same pump house. My opinion of him isn’t dissimilar.

I have no problem if someone who had a hand in guiding and building and growing DCL wants a sign on CC. Matt Ouimet has a sign - It’s deserved. I have a problem when random Disney exec needs his ego stroked so he/she wants a sign. In these cases, it isn’t an honor, like a Main Street Window (although there are a couple of those who aren’t deserving), it’s a vain attempt to look important without doing a damn thing to deserve it.
 

erasure fan1

Well-Known Member
4. Iger likes KK. He personally took the blame off of her for Solo (pushing for a release when the film wasn't ready and the theaters were saturated with the sequel trilogy). And he took the blame off of her for locking SWL into the prequel timeline (he thought the $2B box office for TFA was a sign that the public was totally on board with it).
I agree. The first couple times the rumors came up, I thought it would happen. Now, I'll believe it when I see it. They obviously think cutting ties will be more problematic than the continued turmoil of star wars. I truly believe she needs to go and the franchise will be much better off without her. But I'd be shocked if she's in Igers cross hairs at this time. Now if Indy is a train wreck, I don't see how they keep her around.
If you didn't want to risk creating a new Star Wars story for the new movies all you had to do was get a competent writer and director and adapt the Thrawn trilogy.
That's the problem with Kennedy. She's got very little clue when it comes to star wars. While I've never been a huge fan of the EU material. It had some great ideas that you could pull from. Thrawn is one and Knights of the old republic is another. and the beauty is the vast majority of the heavy lifting was already done. With knights of the old republic you could have gone to Drew karpyshyn for any help with the story. It goes back to the earlier discussion and her saying they don't have the material to draw from like marvel does.
 

kingdead

Well-Known Member
They took the man's sign down? He's not going to jail for accounting but he's not going to jail for something else, is he? Or is there an epidemic of sign vandalism in Disney theme parks?
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom