lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
When it comes to theme parks (which Disney considers the bottom of their barrel and is therefore not at all driving such decisions), they already had the rights to Star Wars when they lost the chance at Harry Potter.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Star Wars Land announced for Disney's Hollywood Studios
- Thread starter CheekBoys
- Start date
My understanding is that after the John Carter movie hugely bombed Disney realized that it would just be cheaper to buy Star Wars and expand it like the Marvel movies. George Lucas borrowed alot of elements from the Edward Rice Burroughs (Tarzan, John Carter/Barsoom Mars series.) space epic opera yet when John Carter came out people thought it was copying Star Wars and dismissed it as something they had never heard of.
Originally, Disney had planned to have a trilogy for John Carter and the first film had a budget of $260 million but after it bombed they scrapped the remaining sequels and bought Star Wars 4 months after John Carter opened. So as late as March 2012, Disney had no plans for Star Wars but were banking on the John Carter trilogy for the next couple years.
Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
The movie of Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is being released next year, and there's a Harry Potter stage play in the works. If someone really wanted to, there could be a new film every year in the Potter universe. It's already been established by the books that there are a number of wizardry schools and hundreds of years of history beyond the seven in which Harry went to Hogwarts. Like Star Wars, an "expanded universe" could easily be developed. The only difference would be getting Ms. Rowling to sign off on it, as she is more protective and critical of what gets attached to her brand.
Last edited:
I hear this argument alot but don't underestimate Harry Potter, Star Wars fans. Potter is here to stay. And Rowling can write as many books as she wants as she is still relatively young. Star Wars was a creation from the last century, the past that they can only reboot and reshuffle while Potter is the present and future.
I would refer you to the full theaters for the current SW movie as a response to your insinuation that SW is old and crusty. If you don't think that there is enough material to take SW movies into the next 100 years then you must think that the galaxy far far away is very tiny.
Lord_Vader
Join me, together we can rule the galaxy.
I have a sneaky suspicion that the new HP movie will be a lot like the Hobbit series with ever declining numbers for the movies, additional books may continue to do well but I don't see it eclipsing SW anytime soon.
SW is a multigenerational, cultural series that should continue to grow more over the next few years. The kids seeing it today will likely 'share' SW with their kids much as my generation has with them. Disney is using every means at their disposal to make sure as many kids as possible are introduced to SW through television, movies and toys. Linking a child's imagination through toys greatly impacts their long-term nostalgia and combined with well produced films generates a lot of excitement as TFA is proving.
HP has a chance to do the same thing but the scale is nowhere close to the same and only time will tell.
The bolded part is so true. One of the things that I remember about Star Wars from my childhood was the action figures. There were so many and they were very detailed. All the cool kids had a complete set. At the time I wasn't as big of a fan as I am today but I do remember the toys.
It's just a reboot of New Hope and making the main character a girl instead of Luke. Box Office Numbers mean little as you could have a monkey direct the new star wars movie and people would give the box office their money.
It's a good established franchise but on the same level as Harry Potter.
It should be interesting to see how the action figures do. The original series the main character was a boy (Luke) and so the toys were basically a boys toy with boys imagining themselves as the main character Luke. But in the reboot the girl Rey is the main character.
The Disney Infinity video games will probably fair much better than the action figures. I guess technically the Infinity series does come with an action figure/statue but that is more a secondary (money grab like Skylander) to the video game.
FigmentJedi
Well-Known Member
TFA's pretty derivative, especially when they decided to force a new Death Star into the mix so early in the game, but really, history repeating itself and rhyming across generations is just continuing what George was doing.
It's poetry, it rhymes.
The whole thought process that TFA is a reboot because there is a death star in it is total bunk. It's actually accurate to assume that a military would continue to use the same style of military vehicle over time. Look at any military and you will see that although technology advances the basic forms of military vehicles and weapons do not change dramatically.
FigmentJedi
Well-Known Member
It's a mix of that and also similarly starting out on a droid with vital information traveling across a sand planet and finding a early 20-something with technical/piloting skills and force sensitivity who feels obligated to stay on the crummy dustball before being thrust into adventure.
Well considering the Harry Potter series are among the best selling books of all time I think you are underestimating their chances of success.
The problem with the live Hobbit movies were they took what was one book and extended it out to 3 books to make more money. That and too much CGI. Really all that was necessary was one movie and I think the cartoon Hobbit movie was better than Jackson's 3 movie trilogy. I also think that Martin Freeman was the wrong choice for the lead. You need someone charismatic and captivating to lead you through 3 movies and I just don't think he had that energy or draw that Elijah Wood and Viggo Mortensen brought to the first movie.
The big studios will do that. Just rehash what was successful in the past. Lucas warned against this.
At some point I prefer things that are fresh ideas (like Guardians of the Galaxy) rather than the umpteenth Avengers or X-men or the third reboot of Spiderman.
If I recall. Luke was doing pretty much everything he could to get off the sand planet....which was the exact subject of the conversation he and his uncle had after aquiring said droids.
Luke would have never left if it wasn't for his uncle and Aunt Beru being burned to a crisp by the Empire.
The deleted scenes have more of a pull for Luke leaving as Biggs comes back to meet Luke and the gang and Biggs tells Luke about his secret plan to drop out of the Empire flight school to join the rebel alliance. This is what sparks Luke's desire to join the rebel alliance.
zooey
Well-Known Member
I think they want the familiarity because it's all about fate, generational continuity, passing from one to the next, and the Force guiding the heroes. In other words: fairy tales. They have motifs and they echo. Once I began thinking of TFA as the beginning of 7,8,9 and not the end of 4,5,6, I got over the similarities.
On the other hand, the nervous sweaty business hand, they obviously put great effort into attempting to inspire a new generation of fans with the same type of movie as 4. Go back to what worked the first time. Despite some story stuff I think they succeeded with excellent casting and new characters that are instantly love able so they will have no trouble carrying a new trilogy and has me excited to see where they go.
FigmentJedi
Well-Known Member
That's why I'm really invested in how the Anthology films do. After this new trilogy wraps up, I want them to explore different parts of the galaxy and timeline. Don't need an Episode 10-12 (or at least right away) just keep telling stories in the Star Wars setting that aren't just the tales of the family Skywalker.
boufa
Well-Known Member
This is an insult to the intelligence of every person who has seen the movie. YOUR movie that YOU like is far superior to what the vast majority of people liked. Your smarter than the unwashed masses, and you just can't figure out why those less intelligent would waste their money.
You like something differrnt, good for you, that doesn't make the rest of us idiots. Personally, I can't stand the HP series. Time will tell if it has the staying power, or not. Come out with a continuing story 35 years from now and see if it does well. Very, very few movies would. I am a passionate star trek fan, but even with the reboots, I don't thint it has anywhere near the staying power of star wars.
10 years after HPs last movie, will it still have the same power with the general public. Fans will always be there, but the me parks need more than just fans to thrive.
Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
It already has. Nearly 20 years after the first book debuted new material is being produced and people are lining up to pay cash for Butterbeer.
Harry Potter is here to stay in some form or another, even if it's just schools having kids read the books. It may not ever be Star Wars popular, but it won't just suddenly be forgotten.