Star Wars VIII release date changed....
- Thread starter Mage
- Start date
I'm certainly very disappointed.
That being said, the biggest eye opener is the Hobbit. I would rather a film like Star Wars take its time to be as well-made as possible, even if it takes longer. But, come on! I don't want to wait another six months.
That being said, the biggest eye opener is the Hobbit. I would rather a film like Star Wars take its time to be as well-made as possible, even if it takes longer. But, come on! I don't want to wait another six months.
In general I can wait, but I'm a "Star Wars movies come out in May, dammit!" traditionalist.
The fact Disney is postponing the film's release for reasons of making more money doesn't shock me, it's Disney, they're the most devout worshippers of the almighty dollar. What does irritate me is that May 2017 is the fortieth anniversary of Star Wars, and Disney has just backed out of that. The Fuck? All this time I've been worried that Paramount or CBS was going to drop the ball for Star Trek's fiftieth this year, and now Disney has done just that with Star Wars and its fortieth. Sure, they'll make money, but the anniversary is not being observed. Way to give fandom the middle finger
That shouldn't be a problem, actually. STID began filming February 2012 and made its May 2013 release, Age of Ultron began filming February 2014 and made its May 2015 release. If this movie has indeed already begun filming now in January 2016 it should be even easier for it to make a May 2017 release. Especially a late May release at that, the other two examples I cited were released middle of the month, and first weekend of the month, respectively. No, this doubtfully has anything to do with production related reasons.
Well, we still have that. Rogue One will be out December 2016.Rats.
They should have moved it up to Dec. 2016. Then we would have a movie a year like LOTR.
Kor
Well, the people who obsess religiously over getting a cleaned-up release of the unaltered OT are now saying that Disney will probably release the unaltered OT on that date.
So maybe that will happen.
Last edited:
Not a big deal, I'd rather they take their time and make a good movie. What with the Anthology films, we're still never going to be more than a year away from new a Star Wars film; And that's good enough for me.
I'll take that over a new movie 6 months earlier any day.
I'm not sure why this is a negative. The movie is going to make a crap ton of money anyway, and it keeps the pattern they started with TFA. Hopefully the quality of the movie will be worth the wait.
I have a friend who worked on Ultron (he was a roto-scoper at the time) out at Double Negative in London and chatting to him a while back, he did say that they were really pushing it to get completion done in time. I have no idea about Into Darkness and its post production.
You could be right about it not being a post-production thing, or I could be right, at this stage with so little known why they moved the release date, it's anyone's guess and the less cynical part of me is going for a "we want to make the best production possible" and that means giving the effects in post some more breathing room to get it done than a purely financial viewpoint.
I’d like to think they simply want to have a regular slot for each, rather than in different parts of the year, especially since the pre-Xmas release did so well for TFA
Didn't asume, considered the possibiliy that IF they had started principal photography back then, they COULD have finished that.
In any case, I can't see post production being part of the decision right now. If they are still doing principal photography, it's doubtful they have any real clue as to how much time they will need exactly for Post. If they have just finished principals, then Post in such an early state that it would be pretty impressive that they could already tell they weren't going to make a release-date 15 months from now.
No, I think that what's been mentioned before, having a Star Wars in cinema's every Christmas, is a thing Disney just likes t do. For reasons.
Didn't asume, considered the possibiliy that IF they had started principal photography back then, they COULD have finished that.
In any case, I can't see post production being part of the decision right now. If they are still doing principal photography, it's doubtful they have any real clue as to how much time they will need exactly for Post. If they have just finished principals, then Post in such an early state that it would be pretty impressive that they could already tell they weren't going to make a release-date 15 months from now.
I assume you have never done any project management, nor any knowledge of what you are talking about including the needs for post production.
You're just looking for things to say about me now, aren't you?
Knock yourself out buddy, I don't mind. Enjoy.Anyway, with a Marvel movie out almost every may, I don't really mind not having to go to cinema's twice. I love movies, but between me and my missus, our time off is usually booked enough already.
I concur. A year and a half between films seems awfully short and I have to imagine that'd hurt quality.
It is 6 months longer than the Harry Potter films or many other Franchise flicks have had over the last decade or so. It isn't like they're starting from square one with that 18 months either. They've had a script and concept art and all sorts of other work started since long before TFA was released. I can see of two likely reasons why they've delayed things:
1. TFA "made" 2 billion dollars as a December release.
2. Adjust the script more than a bit based on unexpected responses to certain characters in TFA.
There really isn't much else that makes for a reasonable delay of that magnitude at this point in production.
1. TFA "made" 2 billion dollars as a December release.
2. Adjust the script more than a bit based on unexpected responses to certain characters in TFA.
There really isn't much else that makes for a reasonable delay of that magnitude at this point in production.
