• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Colin Trevorrow no longer directing Episode IX.

Reverend said:
"refused to fulfil contractual obligations" and/or "uncooperative with the people that hired them"
Click to expand...

That may very well be true, and these guys may be the biggest jerks in the business, I have no way to know that one way or the other.

What I do know is that publicly, there's only been one side that's been acting like petty assholes actively trying to ruin peoples careers, and it ain't the directors... :shrug:
 
dodge said:
That may very well be true, and these guys may be the biggest jerks in the business, I have no way to know that one way or the other.

What I do know is that publicly, there's only been one side that's been acting like petty assholes actively trying to ruin peoples careers, and it ain't the directors... :shrug:
Click to expand...
How is firing people for not doing their job "petty"? And what makes you think this is being done with the express purpose or ruining said people's careers?
 
dodge said:
That may very well be true, and these guys may be the biggest jerks in the business, I have no way to know that one way or the other.

What I do know is that publicly, there's only been one side that's been acting like petty assholes actively trying to ruin peoples careers, and it ain't the directors... :shrug:
Click to expand...
They're not being petty, the directors just apparently aren't doing the job they were hired to do. When you have potentially hundreds of millions to over a billion dollars on the line, you're not going to want to screw around with someone whose being uncooperative.
And before you start raving DC, Lucasfilm has still been able to get out the majority of their films out with only one or two issues each, while DC can't seem to hang on to directors or find decent scripts for half of their movies.
 
Reverend said:
How is firing people for not doing their job "petty"?
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about the firing, I'm talking about the public defamation post firing.
Plenty of people got fired from movies for "creative differences", I just don't recall any studio ever being so vicious about it after the fact, especially two in a row so close together.
 
dodge said:
I'm not talking about the firing, I'm talking about the public defamation post firing.
Plenty of people got fired from movies for "creative differences", I just don't recall any studio ever being so vicious about it after the fact, especially two in a row so close together.
Click to expand...
So far as I'm aware, the official line is just the usual "creative differences" and that's all they're saying publicly. All of the personality inferences are coming from journalists citing inside sources. That's not on Lucasfilm.
 
Reverend said:
All of the personality inferences are coming from journalists citing inside sources. That's not on Lucasfilm.
Click to expand...

Considering how tight they usually keep anything regarding SW under wraps, I'm not sure it's "an accidental leak."
 
The Wormhole said:
Hell, the name Tatooine doesn't show up on screen until the opening crawl of ROTJ and isn't spoken on screen until Phantom Menace.
Click to expand...

It's actually mentioned at the end of Empire, ironically the one OT movie it doesn't feature in, when Luke tells Lando: "I'll meet you at the rendezvous point on Tatooine."
 
Reverend said:
If by "every" you mean "two out of five" and by "asshole" you mean "refused to fulfil contractual obligations" and/or "uncooperative with the people that hired them" then sure, clearly it's all LF's fault.
Click to expand...

Why are you making excuses for the studio system--which, for a long time, had gone by the wayside?

In today's climate, something like RoboCop or Blade Runner or, dare I say it, the original Star Wars, would never be approved. What Disney's doing with the Star Wars "franchise" is playing it safe. I don't give one single flying fuck if a movie makes money, what I care about is if it's good.

I mean, who gives a shit if Lord & Miller didn't make a Han Solo movie that was totally in-line with Lucasfilm's vision? (Admittedly, a huge part of this is on Lucasfilm in the first place; you hired a pair of guys known for doing hard direction but allowing loose improv, what the fuck did you expect?) If it's a misfire, fine, it's a misfire, nothing happens, the world doesn't stop spinning, we don't all get flung into space. But at least it would have been an ambitious misfire.
 
Kennedy and Co. are putting a lot into these movies, so if something isn't work for them, then they have every right to do what they need to do to get what they want.
So far I've really liked everything they've done with Star Wars, so I'm going to trust them to know what is best for the franchise. As long as they continue to put out stuff like TFA, Rogue One, and Rebels they have my continued support.
 
Timby said:
Why are you making excuses for the studio system--which, for a long time, had gone by the wayside?
Click to expand...
I'm not defending or decrying anyone. I have absolutely no stake in either party being in the perceived "right" or "wrong". I'm just stating facts as I see them. People who worked for a company didn't adhere to their contractual obligations and were fired.
What you're suggesting is the same as saying that if a person was fired from McDonalds for pissing in the McFlurry, saying as much constitutes coming to the defence of corporations and all that they represent. Which of course is an utterly myopic argument.
Timby said:
I mean, who gives a shit if Lord & Miller didn't make a Han Solo movie that was totally in-line with Lucasfilm's vision?
Click to expand...
Well Lucasfilm for one and since they're the ones signing all the cheques, their opinion is the one that actually matters.

Those directors take no financial risk by directing a flop. If the film they wanted to make bombs, the worst that happens to them is that maybe Disney never hires them again, and *maybe* other studios never trust them with anything more than a $50m budget. Big whoop. They aren't allowed to spend other people's money again. Boo hoo.

The consequences for Lucasfilm are a bit more dire since they have a parent company and shareholders to answer to and employees who's livelihoods depend on the company continuing to be profitable. Making an expensive flop not only squanders the initial investment, but throttles revenue streams that would have funded other projects, thus limiting or eliminating the creative options for *other* writers and directors.

If they want to have full creative control and make the movie they want to make, then they're free to go write an original script and get funding for it the hard way like Lucas did 40 years ago. So far most of what they're known for is making movies based on other people's ideas, so the image of the poor victimised artists is a little hard to credit.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top