To address your second point first. Releasing one film every year means simultaneous production. Episode 7 is planned for release in 2015 with episode 8 to follow in 2017. Whatever film they have planned for 2016, they will not wait until the finish episode 7 before they start it. This is far more like how TV is made. You don't complete one whole episode before starting to make the next one. The process of making a film has three basic phases; preproduction, principal photography and post-production. It is actually conceivable that filming could begin on Episode 8 before Episode 7 is even released. To take a different film series, the Harry Potter movies were mostly released at a rate of one per year, with a 2 year gap between the 5th and 6th films. That doesn't mean each film was completed in just 1 year, start to finish.

 

Interesting question about big names though. The Original Trilogy mostly contained unknown actors, but not exclusively. Alec Guiness and Peter Cushing were well known and respected actors with well over a hundred films between them. The rest were unknown, but Lucas made the first movie on a very tight budget. He couldn't afford big names, but would he have had them if he could?

 

Well, in the prequel trilogy he did. It's packed with well known actors; Liam Neeson, Ewan McGregor, Natalie Portman, Terence Stamp, Brian Blessed, Samuel L Jackson, Christopher Lee, Jimmy Smits, Temuera Morrison ... Whether they are better or worse films as a result is debatable, but George Lucas himself has set the precedent here. A Star Wars film packed with big names would not be anything new.

 

Edit - one thing I will say about RDjr in Avengers; I do agree with you that he stole every scene he was in, but I don't think it was because he was the most famous actor. I think the scene stealing was down to a combination of him being the most charismatic actor and having the most interesting character. Its the same reason that I think Harrison Ford steals every scene he is in in the original trilogy.

I think your right about actors as well. Nonetheless Lucas does attempt to strike a balance between the more well known actors and less well known actors and I think Lucas is right in choosing (disagree with me if you will) less well known actors for the main part e.g. Mark Hamill and Hayden Christensen. If it had been someone more well known I think it would have been harder to engage in the universe. For example whenever I see Downey Jr. on the screen I don't think 'Iron Man' or 'Sherlock Holmes' I think: Robert Downey Jr. is you get what I mean. Although admittedly Samuel L. Jackson worked well.

There was a one year gap between each Harry Potter film? Interesting, I wasn't aware of that. I'm no expert on how films are produced, I'll admit that, so it would seem it is possible to produce good quality films in such a short space of time. That is encouraging.

 

I think your right about actors as well. Nonetheless Lucas does attempt to strike a balance between the more well known actors and less well known actors and I think Lucas is right in choosing (disagree with me if you will) less well known actors for the main part e.g. Mark Hamill and Hayden Christensen. If it had been someone more well known I think it would have been harder to engage in the universe. For example whenever I see Downey Jr. on the screen I don't think 'Iron Man' or 'Sherlock Holmes' I think: Robert Downey Jr. is you get what I mean. Although admittedly Samuel L. Jackson worked well.

I think you're right about striking a balance. We should also remember that this will not only be a Star Wars movie, but also a JJ Abrams movie. On the directors commentary of Star Trek, JJ actually admits that he wanted to make Star Trek, more like Star Wars. Perhaps then, his version of Star Trek gives us an insight into how he wants to do Star Wars.

Abrams' Star Trek is full of fairly well know actors. All of the main cast are familiar faces from film and television, but none of them are what I would call big stars. Yes, I've seen Simon Pegg and Zoe Saldana and Karl Urban etc. in other movies, but they are not famous enough to distract you from the characters they are playing.

If rumours about returning original cast members prove true I think JJ should set the casting director a simple rule; Harrison Ford should be the biggest name in the movie.

If rumours about returning original cast members prove true I think JJ should set the casting director a simple rule; Harrison Ford should be the biggest name in the movie.

 

P.S. The Marvel movies aren't really held in that high regard, and are certainly not in the collections of every movie goer since 1977. They are fun distractions, generic action movies, not much more.

I agree with you that Marvel Movies are full of cliches but just check out the comic source is full of them too, definetly not best movies, on the other hand you have most Diney studios movies, I mean even if made for kids, adults, etc. they are good stories

I agree with you that Marvel Movies are full of cliches but just check out the comic source is full of them too, definetly not best movies, on the other hand you have most Diney studios movies, I mean even if made for kids, adults, etc. they are good stories

Really I think the topic of Marvel has little to do with the upcoming Star Wars films as ultimately they will be produced by Bad Robot and Lucasarts under Kathleen Kennedy, directed by J.J Abrams and written by Micheal Ardnt - these are the people we should look to when gauging how successful the films will be. I expect Disney's role will be merely to rubber-stamp it and provide commercial support i.e. advertising.

Admittedly I momentarily lost sight of this, but I've refocused!

So what? You don't have to watch that crap. I've never watched the Marvel cartoons. I've also never read a Star Wars book or a Star Wars comic. I'm only interested in the films.

 

So far Marvel Studios have released;

 

Iron Man (2008)

The Incredible Hulk

Iron Man 2

Thor

Captain America

The Avengers (2012)

 

6 movies in 4 years ans only one of them (Hulk) was so so. The rest were hugely entertaining and commercially successful.

Whaaat????

Hulk, Iron Man 2 and Captain America were all terrible. Thor had lousy action but was saved by Anthony Hopkins and Loki.

Whaaat????

 

Hulk, Iron Man 2 and Captain America were all terrible. Thor had lousy action but was saved by Anthony Hopkins and Loki.

Honestly, the quality of the Marvel Studios movies really isn't the issue here. I merely mentioned them in response to a question about whether it is possible to make movies in rapid succession without a loss of quality. It's a bad choice of example to support the case that it is, if you don't like the Marvel movies. Let's not forget though that Star Wars is not being made by the same people, just that the IP is now owned by the same company.

Perhaps my case would have been better made if I had chosen to cite the Harry Potter movies as evidence, or some other film franchise? James Bond (24 films in the space of 50 years)? Twilight? I don't know. I can't second guess your taste in movies.

Whaaat????

 

Hulk, Iron Man 2 and Captain America were all terrible. Thor had lousy action but was saved by Anthony Hopkins and Loki.

That's just your opinion, personally except for the 1st hulk movie (which was terrible) I enjoyed & own all of them. Including the hulk reboot. Everybody's saying Disney will ruin star wars, but if u look at the Disney catalogue of movies....for the most part everything they touch turned to gold.

That's just your opinion, personally except for the 1st hulk movie (which was terrible) I enjoyed & own all of them. Including the hulk reboot. Everybody's saying Disney will ruin star wars, but if u look at the Disney catalogue of movies....for the most part everything they touch turned to gold.

There was a one year gap between each Harry Potter film? Interesting, I wasn't aware of that. I'm no expert on how films are produced, I'll admit that, so it would seem it is possible to produce good quality films in such a short space of time. That is encouraging.

 

I think your right about actors as well. Nonetheless Lucas does attempt to strike a balance between the more well known actors and less well known actors and I think Lucas is right in choosing (disagree with me if you will) less well known actors for the main part e.g. Mark Hamill and Hayden Christensen. If it had been someone more well known I think it would have been harder to engage in the universe. For example whenever I see Downey Jr. on the screen I don't think 'Iron Man' or 'Sherlock Holmes' I think: Robert Downey Jr. is you get what I mean. Although admittedly Samuel L. Jackson worked well.

The thing with the casting in the Avengers is that aside from Downey Jr, you actually see a very similar setup to the casting in the Star Wars films. A handful of really well known actors (Christopher Lee, for example) alongside established and talented but otherwise "faceless" actors who are cast because they fit a character very well.

Captain America and Thor were cast well, but they are also fairly simple characters. Cap is compelling in his direct, unflinching manner and his absolutely pure moral compass, the actor portrays him so well that you almost feel guilty for not measuring up to that man's standards. And Robert Downey Jr. plays Iron Man very well, just the way Christopher Lee played Saruman. Er.... Count Dooku. And Alec Guinness stepped easily into the role of Obi-Wan.

Quite honestly, there is nothing in the franchise management of Disney's portfolios which gives me any reason to worry. They've selected outstanding writers, directors, and financed the whole thing while not letting anyone's ideas run too far away and endanger the franchise. The casting will probably be done well, just like everything else.

Not really, Disney is a company that does take care of the brands it buys and uses the resources to make quality stuff, I doubt your judgement.

If by Quality stuff you mean THIS then I must question your definition of Quality.