I admire your optimism in this regard.
Wonder Woman's Patty Jenkins is Directing a Rogue Squadron Movie
- Thread starter JD
- Start date
Indeed. There is a big difference in how to approach media. Am I disappointed by some of the choices in the ST? Absolutely, and revisiting TFA recently cemented that. But, am I angry about it? Not in the slightest. Life moves on.
I imagine we will get a Rogue Squadron style movie or show someday. It's to good of concept. Just like it was inevitable someone would figure how to do a Bobba Fett show or movie. I just wish it was Patti Jenkins. She seemed to really want to do it and I like how she wanted to do it for her dad so it feels like it would even be a passion project. Plus like mentioned I am not down on her due to Wonder Woman 84. I liked that movie.
I suspect much of the disagreement came down to practicality. Just from hearing her talk about it, I think she really wanted to make the Star Wars version of Battle of Britain, and it just wasn't in the [technology] cards. Her eyes were bigger than her stomach, so to speak, and when Disney told her to tone it down, she wouldn't budge.
Yeah. Because, when you get down to it, while those have a lot of eye candy, they don't really have a lot of substance. Or rather, the lack the intimacy of a great fur ball. Aviator versus aviator -- the romantic dance of it all. But to really capture that, you need to got fully practical.
We all have a good idea what to expect from TG2, and I think Jenkins saw this as an opportunity for one-upmanship. But how to you transfer the realism Cruise is going for in an air battle into space? Certainly not with CGI and editing trickery.
We all have a good idea what to expect from TG2, and I think Jenkins saw this as an opportunity for one-upmanship. But how to you transfer the realism Cruise is going for in an air battle into space? Certainly not with CGI and editing trickery.
Oh, I see what you mean. Like for starters a campaign hashed out with expert players?
Well it is Star Wars. Style over substance isn't the worst thing in the world as long as you have some fun characters along for the ride. If she had captured the spirit of Star Trek 09 with maybe a pilot on his first mission or something and having to interact with some lovable rogue types as they protect Corusant from a revenge attack shortly after Vadar and the Empire has fallen.
I have no evidence to support it beyond wild hypothesis or "If I was gonna do it," but I think to actually achieve what she was hinting at it in interviews, she would have actually had to film real aerial footage. So I can actually see them rigging a fleet of acrobatic aircraft (As they could best emulate Zero-G maneuverability) with an advanced MOCAP system. But never getting the desired results.
Here's something interesting about nuBSG S1 E10 "The Hand of God" [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hand_of_God_(2004_Battlestar_Galactica)#Production]:
I think the drama surrounding the battle plan and its reveal totally worked in that episode. It's a really good example of how you don't need lots of bells and whistles or overwhelming complexity for a skiffy space battle to be dramatic and compelling.
Roslin receives her briefing on Starbuck's plan on an illuminated table with large figurines representing ships; the plan is later tracked on it as the raid is underway. Moore explained that the decision to use the "big board" was a result of financial and narrative constraints. Using computer graphics to narrate space battles is often expensive, and the product often has to be simplified heavily so the viewer can understand it. The idea for a big board came from classic films about World War II such as Sink the Bismarck!, Tora! Tora! Tora!, and Midway. The idea for the models came from production designer Richard Hudolin.[3]
[...]
3. Moore, Ron (10 Mar 2005). "Battlestar Galactica episode 110 commentary" (Podcast). Retrieved 16 Jul 2011.
[...]
3. Moore, Ron (10 Mar 2005). "Battlestar Galactica episode 110 commentary" (Podcast). Retrieved 16 Jul 2011.
I think the drama surrounding the battle plan and its reveal totally worked in that episode. It's a really good example of how you don't need lots of bells and whistles or overwhelming complexity for a skiffy space battle to be dramatic and compelling.
Yes. There's that aspect to it too, which is why named dropped BoB. As the stuff in the Ops bunker are some of the best bits of the film. In this case, I could actually see Mon being a central character.
**That is to say, in a way that's more engaging and dynamic than Carrie making stoic dramatic faces at the camera.
**That is to say, in a way that's more engaging and dynamic than Carrie making stoic dramatic faces at the camera.
That just reminded me of an issue I had with the Big Board scenes on BSG, that being their easy access to models of ships they only just encountered, specifically when the Pegasus showed up and they were planning the joint strike against the Cylon Resurrection Ship, both of which are represented by models. Now, I'll entertain they might have had a model of a Pegasus style Battlestar kicking around their model collection, but the Resurrection Ship was a ship they didn't even know existed a day earlier. How'd they get a model of that ready so soon?
I mean, we have 3D printers right now. It's not that much of a stretch that they have something similar.
There was this kid on the Caprica Clipper, a really talented model maker, but with nothing much to do most of the time....
When it comes down to it, they a both producing movies, it doesn't really make that much of a difference if they are part of a franchise or not. Most of the stuff that actually makes it a franchise is going to be handled by the Story Group and the writers, rather than people like Kennedy.
There have been quite a few issues with the MCU over the years, but the people who worship Feige and hate Kennedy like to overlook the MCU's issues, and emphasize Lucasfilm's.
Hell, Feige and Co. were so controlling they chased off Joss Whedon, and then screwed around with Ant-Man for so long that Edgar Wright pretty much threw up his hands and said screw this. Patti Jenkins left Thor: The Dark World pretty much the same as she did with Rogue Squadron, and we just had Scott Derrickson leave Dr. Strange & The Multiverse of Madness last year. All of that, and I don't remember once hearing anybody want Feige fired, but practically from the first moment someone left a Star Wars movie certain people have been screaming for Kathleen Kennedy to be fired.
Honestly, with these big franchise's it's starting to become a relatively normal thing to have at least one director leave a project before it really gets going, just look at The Flash movie.
I think it's more about the two sides just wanting the movie to be different things, and not really about anybody being bad at their jobs.
I think Kennedy and Feige are going into these movies wanting very specific things, and then trying to find a director who will give them that. If one director isn't willing to give them that, then they just find another, rather than forcing the movie to become something else, or forcing the director to do something they don't want to do. We've seen both of those things happen in the past, and it doesn't turn out well. It's best to just move on, and try to find someone who is more willing to work with Marvel or Lucasfilm, and will give them what they want.
Who had done a great job with Avengers, but many of the parts of AoU that didn't work very well - Ultron's nonstop quipping, his boring "nuke the world to save it" plan, the Bruce/Natasha romance - were very clearly all him. Yes, he deserves credit for the inspired farmhouse sequence, and the brief Thor vision-bathing sequence that was forced on him wasn't the best five minutes of screen time, but in the wake of AoU's release, it seemed clear he might not be the best voice to keep guiding the overall story.
Given how superior the Ant-Man flicks are to Scott Pilgrim and Baby Driver, I for one call that a win.
A movie which, from what I've heard, turned out far better than WW84...
And in return, got the director of the Spider-Man trilogy, which is a fair trade at the very least, and gives Raimi a chance to make his second good Marvel film. So, all these production hiccups have turned out pretty dang well so far.
Kennedy, OTOH, thought that the hack who immediately sabotaged his own Trek reboot series with the obviously misconceived Into Darkness should be the one to revive Star Wars. She signed off on a crappy ANH remake that threw the ending of RotJ in the trash, and ensured Luke, Leia, and Han would never share a scene again. She then approved of as astoundingly misguided sequel that left so little setup for a concluding chapter that resurrecting Palpatine was the best the team could do on a tight schedule. She also oversaw two pretty okay standalones, with a whole lot of behind-the-scenes turmoil. Yes, The Mandalorian is now doing quite well, but that seems to be the brainchild of Filoni and Favreau from a creative standpoint.
Maybe Kennedy's an excellent producer on the technical side of things, ably managing budgets, keeping production schedules on track, and retaining key talent. But I haven't seen any evidence she's got any skill for the storytelling side of things... whereas Feige quite clearly has a knack for both.
Who had done a great job with Avengers, but many of the parts of AoU that didn't work very well - Ultron's nonstop quipping, his boring "nuke the world to save it" plan, the Bruce/Natasha romance - were very clearly all him. Yes, he deserves credit for the inspired farmhouse sequence, and the brief Thor vision-bathing sequence that was forced on him wasn't the best five minutes of screen time, but in the wake of AoU's release, it seemed clear he might not be the best voice to keep guiding the overall story.
Given how superior the Ant-Man flicks are to Scott Pilgrim and Baby Driver, I for one call that a win.
A movie which, from what I've heard, turned out far better than WW84...
And in return, got the director of the Spider-Man trilogy, which is a fair trade at the very least, and gives Raimi a chance to make his second good Marvel film. So, all these production hiccups have turned out pretty dang well so far.
Kennedy, OTOH, thought that the hack who immediately sabotaged his own Trek reboot series with the obviously misconceived Into Darkness should be the one to revive Star Wars. She signed off on a crappy ANH remake that threw the ending of RotJ in the trash, and ensured Luke, Leia, and Han would never share a scene again. She then approved of as astoundingly misguided sequel that left so little setup for a concluding chapter that resurrecting Palpatine was the best the team could do on a tight schedule. She also oversaw two pretty okay standalones, with a whole lot of behind-the-scenes turmoil. Yes, The Mandalorian is now doing quite well, but that seems to be the brainchild of Filoni and Favreau from a creative standpoint.
Maybe Kennedy's an excellent producer on the technical side of things, ably managing budgets, keeping production schedules on track, and retaining key talent. But I haven't seen any evidence she's got any skill for the storytelling side of things... whereas Feige quite clearly has a knack for both.
This is why I often compare her to Rick Berman. Berman actually was good in terms of making Trek profitable for a very long time. He was a natural born bean counter. But he was not a artist and most of his creative ideas were bad and frankly lead to Trek dying eventually until it's rebirth through the Kelvinverse movies. Star Wars is still making money and that seems to be enough to keep Kennedy aboard. But eventually the failure of the sequels to really win people over or to create any movies that spark the imagination in anything close to the older movies will eventually hurt the franchise. At least in terms of movies. The tv side is still going strong.
