Steven Spielberg Says He Wouldn’t Make Indiana Jones 5 Without George Lucas!

IndyDisney recently announced that Indiana Jones will return for it’s fifth go around of the epic adventure  series in 2019. However, Steven Spielberg the man directing the film, said he wouldn’t go at a fifth outing in the series without a certain friend joining him for the ride. Read on for more details.



Steven Spielberg, the man who directed all four previous films in the series, will return for the 5th adventure of the saga with star Harrison Ford reprising his iconic role. The film is said to follow the continuing adventures of archaeologist Dr. Jones as he embarks on yet another journey to recover ancient artifacts that belong in museums. The four previous films in the Indiana Jones series have generated close to $2 billion dollars at the global box office. Along with Spielberg and Ford, the franchise will also enlist Kathleen Kennedy (Star Wars: The Force Awakens) as producer.


Just a few days ago Spielberg mentioned during a chat with The Hollywood Reporter that death for Indiana Jones is not in the franchise’s future.

“The one thing I will tell you is I’m not killing off Harrison [Ford] at the end of it.” He said.



So fans are going to get the legendary Spielberg, Ford as Indy and Kathleen Kennedy, producing the fifth film in the series. Now, all fans will need is one person that has been a big part of the series to join them on its epic return to cinemas. reports that at Monday’s press gathering to promote Steven Spielberg’s The BFG, the director was asked about the fifth Indiana Jones adventure and if George Lucas would have any involvement in the project. Spielberg replied:

“George is going to be an executive producer on it with me,” he said. “Of course — I would never make an ‘Indiana Jones’ film without George Lucas,” Spielberg said. “That would be insane.”


The two legends of cinema have collaborated on all of the Indiana Jones films to date. Seriously, why wouldn’t Disney have the now retired from directing George Lucas involved in its revival. Could we be seeing the beginnings of one last magical hurrah between the two directors? It looks like that will be the case.



Spielberg also said that, although George wasn’t directly involved in the production of last year’s Star Wars: The Force Awakens, he mentioned that his ideas were all over that film.

“George Lucas’ fingerprints are on ‘The Force Awakens,’” Spielberg pointed out, “because that movie is an homage to Episode[s] IV, V and VI — a complete homage. George Lucas is all over ‘The Force Awakens.’ Lest we ever forget that.”


Indiana Jones and the “Untitled” is scheduled to hit theaters on July 19, 2019.


+ posts

132 thoughts on “Steven Spielberg Says He Wouldn’t Make Indiana Jones 5 Without George Lucas!

  • June 22, 2016 at 4:47 pm

    *Insert “Brace Yourselves” meme*

    • June 22, 2016 at 5:16 pm

      I would agree about the past, except this isn’t the past, it’s the future.

      I assume and hope Spielberg is being polite and that Lucas will NOT insist on his own ideas and will be gracious in acquiescing to other’s ideas

      • June 22, 2016 at 5:25 pm

        Collaborations and a mix of ideas will happen (as it’s been for all Indy movies in the past, from all (not just one) parties involved) but the executive producer role isn’t really that involving from a creative standpoint in the 1st place.

        • June 22, 2016 at 6:10 pm

          So much for not discussing…

          He was always the Exec Producer and wielded enormous control

          • June 22, 2016 at 6:21 pm

            I disagree with your second sentence but we will agree to disagree as I really don’t want to get into a discussion about control and whatnot (plus I’m busy with other stuff at the moment such as work lol).

          • June 22, 2016 at 6:21 pm

            Funny, because he created the story for all the others, he didn’t produce them… Might wanna get your facts straight. George has always done fine in the producers chair. It’s the directing and writing he needs help with.

          • June 22, 2016 at 6:39 pm

            You’ve no idea what you’re talking about.

    • June 22, 2016 at 5:42 pm

      Leslie, is that you? Got tired of having your own comments deleted with your controlling demands and death threats for those that dare disagree with you and your copy/pasted diatribe?

      • June 22, 2016 at 5:53 pm

        Don’t dare!

        • June 22, 2016 at 6:28 pm

          Good think I can’t see his comments now (he was one of the 1st users I blocked, and for good reason (that other guy was another person I blocked as well); Thank goodness Disqus added this blocking feature now).

    • June 22, 2016 at 5:52 pm

      Meh. Whatever. Lucas or no Lucas, I don’t have high hopes for Indy 5.

      • June 23, 2016 at 3:56 pm

        Reboot now, remember how fired up we all got when the Chris Pratt rumour went round?
        That’s the sort of enthusiasm they need for this. Whether George is involved or not.

        • June 23, 2016 at 10:16 pm

          I don’t mind Ford, Spielberg and Lucas going at it one more time, but I won’t be surprised if the story isn’t all that good.

          I’m open to seeing Indy getting the Bond Treatment down the road. I just hope Lucasfilm can find new people who can give the reboot a life of its own rather than rely too much on nostalgia.

    • June 22, 2016 at 8:16 pm

      Yeah, but that’s just Marsha Marsha Marsha, so who gives a shit?

  • June 22, 2016 at 4:56 pm

    I wish they could get him back for Star Wars as well. At least in an advisory capacity.

    • June 22, 2016 at 8:34 pm

      When Kathleen Kennedy took control of Lucasfilm, she kicked him out on the curb like a dog. I don’t think he can come back unless she’s replaced by a decent person.

  • June 22, 2016 at 5:46 pm

    Great. I was having doubts about this movie but now knowing that Lucas will be there with his awesome ideas of surviving nukes in refrigerators, cutesy CGI prairie dogs, inter-dimensional aliens in ancient temples and cartoonish monkey vine swinging sequences, my faith in the film is completely solid!

    • June 22, 2016 at 5:55 pm

      I will keep up with news with 100% positivism unless shown otherwise. Your shading throwing at Lucas will put you in a risk.

      • June 22, 2016 at 6:01 pm

        Shaders gonna shade.

        • June 22, 2016 at 6:08 pm

          Are you serious?

    • June 22, 2016 at 8:16 pm

      You need to read the Raiders story conferences. No jibe, no sarcasm. Read them and tell me which of those two guys you believe is responsible for the worst of KS.

      • June 23, 2016 at 1:09 am

        I’m guessing it was the man who gave us all the stupid crap in the prequels a few years earlier.

        • June 23, 2016 at 1:37 am

          You’d be guessing wrong then.

          • June 23, 2016 at 1:50 am

            George was responsible for the nuked fridge scene. That’s at least one stupid ass idea that we can attribute to him. Lucas also came up with alien idea. He wanted to call it, “Indiana Jones and the Saucer Men From Mars.” Yeah, that’s a real winner. And I’m going to bet that the CGI monkey and prairie dogs were his as well – because Lucas cannot pass up an opportunity to use goofball cartoonish CGI as the prequels showed us.

          • June 23, 2016 at 12:02 pm

            Almost: Spielberg was the fridge and Prairie Dogs, Lucas was the monkeys.

          • June 23, 2016 at 4:54 pm

            Lucas was the fridge. Spielberg said the fridge was his to deflect criticism from George. But Lucas later said it was his idea, and that Steven took the blame for it.

          • June 24, 2016 at 1:48 am

            Dammit George, you’re meant to avoid scrutiny, not encourage it.

          • June 23, 2016 at 8:49 pm

            Spielberg was the DIRECTOR! His movie, right?

            Of course Lucas created the series & closely oversaw the beginnings.
            He didn’t let Spielberg get away w/his crazy/stupid kiddy stuff in Raiders, but allowed him free rein in Temple of Doom (see how that turned out).

            Translation to what you wrote:
            “blah blah…lack of citation… hate Lucas – blame him for everything I don’t like & give credit to Spielberg for everything I do”.
            Or do you credit Lucas w/everything good about the other Indy flicks you *DO* like? ( don’t answer, that was rhetorical – your anti-Lucas rant answered that already )

          • June 23, 2016 at 10:08 pm

            Here is the source:

            I don’t hate Lucas. I just think that when he has ideas that are stupid and make no sense, it’s fair to say that they are stupid and make no sense. Just like he is praised for everything great that he contributed over the years, those good things don’t deify him and make him immune from criticism for his crappy ideas. And yes, it is possible for someone to have both bad ideas and good ideas. It’s not completely one or the other and black and white.

          • June 23, 2016 at 10:35 pm

            There were many articles (from interviews) out during the original Indy movies, which demonstrated it was Lucas who kept Spielberg’s crazy ideas to a minimum w/Raiders & let Spielberg have his way w/Temple of Doom ( flying raft & amusement park ride mining train as possible examples ).

            The crux of my point is that you’re stating your lack of faith is due to Lucas & *his* bad ideas, whilst not commenting on Spielberg. Quite selective there, which hints that your beef is w/Lucas rather than the director of Krystal Skull.
            Seriously that is just ridiculous – the director, particularly in this case, is the one making the movie. It was Spielberg’s call & just as much his idea, once he decided he wanted to include it, as Lucas.

            It’s obvious from your comments you have a beef w/Lucas ( referencing prequels ) & that’s blinded you to who actually made KS.
            As @disqus_vZ0dUFqRKx:disqus stated, go read-up on this & you’ll see Mr Spielberg is just as (well, *more*!) guilty than Lucas for bad ideas he included in HIS movie.

          • June 23, 2016 at 10:44 pm

            I wasn’t referring to Raiders. I was referring to Crystal Skull. The movies were made over 25 years apart

            It’s obvious that you have elevated Lucas to a godlike status and refuse to accept the concept of him coming up with bad ideas, so you feel the need to defend any criticism and deflect it onto others, including one of the greatest directors of all time, the man who made Schindler’s List and Saving Private Ryan, and try to characterize his ideas as being all goofball ideas, when we saw no shortage of cartoonish stupidity just years prior in Lucas’ prequel trilogy.

            Spielberg relented to Lucas’ dumb ideas out of friendship and the knowledge the George was paying for the thing. But if you want to compare both filmmakers on the level of seriousness vs. goofiness, sorry, Spielberg wins any day of the week.

    • June 22, 2016 at 8:32 pm

      Not sure if ir’s sarcasm but that’s exactly what Di$ney wants us to react. It oinly works on the weak minded and the lost.

      • June 23, 2016 at 1:07 am

        I thought I was laying on the sarcasm pretty thickly there, but yeah, it was.

  • June 22, 2016 at 5:57 pm

    “George Lucas’ fingerprints are on ‘The Force Awakens,’” Spielberg pointed out, “because that movie is an homage to Episode[s] IV, V and VI — a complete homage. George Lucas is all over ‘The Force Awakens.’ Lest we ever forget that.”

    I prefer the word “rehash”. “Homage” makes TFA’s lazy, safe script sound like a positive thing. I went out of my way to avoid spoilers only to realize we had already been spoiled back in ’77.

    Star Wars deserved better. You have failed me for the last time, Abrams.

    • June 22, 2016 at 6:06 pm

      Homage was needed after Star Wars was driven off a cliff. Star Wars deserved better than what we got from ’99-’05. The Force Awakens was a restoration project and it successfully restored Star Wars and the critics and audiences loved it. So deal with it.

      • June 22, 2016 at 9:52 pm

        StarWars doesn’t need a restoration but an evolution, i believe prequels did that in a lot of ways, but i think maybe this homage was a good thing after all, at least in the way to get the atention, It doesn’t give us something new, but it give us an very well done movie.

      • June 23, 2016 at 1:46 am

        The Prequels hurt Star Wars’ brand, but it also gave TFA an excuse to aim low.

        • June 23, 2016 at 5:33 am

          You stating that….makes me hate them more.


    • June 22, 2016 at 6:06 pm

      Enough whining already! Yes, we get it, you don’t like TFA at all, but do you have to keep up in shoving is your comments multiple times? Hell no, it makes you look like if your only purpose on the website is just to complain and not him more. The rest, on the other hand, at least tries to add more interesting comments on a certain topic without bordering on reviewing a movie. Oh, and you will ignore my comment and rest because you think you are the only sane one in the website on regards to the new course of the Star Wars franchise, while its actually the other way around. You sir, are nothing but a sad strange little man who has nothing else other than keep complaining and complaining until someone accepts you. And that’s it’s the pure truth of the ones who will doomed for failure and mockery because they only followed negative feelings in moving on, got it?

      • June 23, 2016 at 1:49 am

        Enough with telling me to stop whining! ;B

        Look. If you don’t like my opinions, then just ignore them. Plenty of room on the Interwebs for us all.

      • June 24, 2016 at 1:44 am

        Aaaaaaand blocked.

    • June 22, 2016 at 9:46 pm

      People, I gree with all of you, please let me include my point of view here, everyone have a point here, I think TFA its an amazing movie I like it a lot, but i still think it is the worst movie of all seven, and at the same time it is the best of all seven. And that happens when you perfeclty use all the resources in a very controled manner; script, acting, special effects, etc. but rehashing story and scenes, it is an almost perfect remake.

      Imagine the same story, with the same 2015 special effects, same characters, but a most risky enviroment, different ships, different planets, different super-gigantic evil weapon. I think that could be amazing. But without Tie-fighters and the prehistoric millenium falcon maybe you don’t get all the atention, and some people would not be to much atracted to this movie, so in part i think it is a fine strategic safe way to make it, an make it very well and say it is a homage in purpose.

      So i think that’s the reason it is the worst and the best movie of all seven. And yes i think Star wars deserve better, but is a good way to restart the franchise after the Anakin/Vader story, and helped a lot of people to open eyes wider, people who thought they hated Lucas and now after TFA they begin to change his mind, and realized maybe Star Wars still needs Lucas.

      And if you see the complete picture maybe its not that bad if it is a rehash, at least to start the new trilogy, and dont think they need to do the same with the next two films, i hope they don’t.

      • June 23, 2016 at 2:47 am

        I originally thought TFA was amazing, but that reaction died after the first dozen or so times I saw it. While it rehashes a lot, it was also the funniest Star Wars film ever. Even the main villain was hilarious. It had plenty of audience-pleasing moments, like BB-8’s thumbs-up and some of Chewie’s reactions.

        I didn’t have a problem with the Falcon, X-Wings, TIE Fighters and other OT-inspired ships and designs. My rehashing complaints center around how much of the story copied ANH, and, to a lesser degree, TESB and ROTJ. Another super weapon that blows up a planet and needs to be destroyed by the end of the film. (Long before I had learned about Starkiller Base, I had predicted that Abrams would blow up a planet, possibly with heroes looking at the destruction. Why? Because that’s what he did with original Spock and Vulcan in Star Trek ’09.) Another Jedi protagonist on a desert planet. Another mentor figure who gets killed by the main Force wielder in black wielding a lightsaber. Another droid carrying the McGuffin that everyone’s after.

        When the rehashing is this much, the film becomes bland and predictable.They could’ve given us a film filled with familiar ships and such while having a story that was new. If nothing else, take out that eyesore of a Death Star. Fans had already complained about it being in ROTJ.

        I don’t think VIII or IX will be rehashes, at least not like TFA was. Hmm. Oh well. Thanks. 🙂

        • June 23, 2016 at 6:48 am

          Yes,agree again, you have a really solid point about it, J.J talks about the surprise element, but, How can you do that if you are making a story everybody knows already. When you get it you can predict almost everything.

          I don’t want to say i learned to accept the movie, but i focus in the new stuff, because i think there are good stuff in it, just as you said. And i think the movie is good in the way it had executed.

          I dont know your opinion about prequels but i think those three movies are way better than TFA in a lot of ways, begining with originality. TFA is better in other sense, but i think PT have a lot more to offer, besides all the bad stuff you can say about them.

          Although I liked the new x-wing designs, and the new Ties, i was not really in to it, i really expected new stuff, new ships.

          I was a little nervous when i read JJ was to direct the new movie, i was like 50/50, 50% in favor because of his previous work, and because i knew he were a SW fan, and the other 50% was because I dindn’t really like what he did with StarTrek, i liked some bits, but not in general. And when i saw the first image, with Tie-fighters, X-wings. I wasnt really pleased, because everything pointed that he was making some kind of remake.

          So, hopefully they will read our comments and the next films will blow our minds 🙂

          “So Say We All” ha ha

          • June 23, 2016 at 10:41 pm

            Yeah. For all the complaints I have about the Prequels, they were a lot more original than TFA. They rhymed in places with the OT, but I’ve never heard of anyone complaining that they were rehashes.

            Although I didn’t like what he did with Star Trek, I was at least hopeful that TFA would be better since he cared about it more. Plus, Kasdan was involved while Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof were not, so I didn’t have to worry about midi-chlorian magic blood. Oh well. ;B

            At least Abrams isn’t doing the entire trilogy! xD

          • June 24, 2016 at 1:44 am

            I don’t know how anyone was surprised by what Abrams did with TFA. Hell, go back on these here boards and I think I called it months before release – a snappy film that moves along really well, handles its cast competently, and is fun, but is at its core as dumb as a sack of rocks – an homage by a guy who doesn’t understand WHY the things his cinematic heroes did work in their films, so he apes them dumbly. In essence, the exact opposite of the prequels, which were clumsy, inconsistently paced, left the actors adrift, but had a really interesting story to tell.

          • June 24, 2016 at 4:15 am

            I’m not surprised. I was just hoping he’d do better with Star Wars. I also overestimated Kasdan’s ability to improve the script.

            It’s not much, but at least Abrams kept the lens flares to a minimum. ;B

    • June 25, 2016 at 8:01 am

      and thats the thing. a homage is a specific scene, shot, character, or line. The Force Awakens is literally an assembly line of “homages”. at a certain point it stops being a “homage” and becomes a rehash or a remake. and TFA past that point about half way through.

      • June 25, 2016 at 9:46 pm

        “…an assembly line of “homages.”

        Got to commit that one to memory. ;B

      • June 26, 2016 at 6:03 am

        Star Wars is an assembly of homages to Flash Gordon, Hidden Fortress and Buck Rogers comic strips.

  • June 22, 2016 at 7:24 pm

    Got to admire Spielberg sticking with Lucas. Everyone forgets Spielberg had influence in Indy 4 and is just as responsible, maybe they both wish to give Indy a good send off.

    • June 22, 2016 at 8:14 pm

      Everyone forgets that the TRULY insane shit in that movie is stuff Speilberg has been floating since the original Raiders story conferences.

      • June 22, 2016 at 8:29 pm

        I didn’t know that.

        • June 22, 2016 at 9:28 pm

          Totally have a read through – it’s very enlightening, and a hell of a good read to boot. Lucas, Spielberg and Kasdan all sitting around a table and basically creating Raiders as they talk it out. Mostly it’s the two of them, with Kasdan asking for clarification (although there’s also this great moment when he comes up with setting up Indy’s fear of snakes, and how they should foreshadow it in the opening, then have the payoff in the Well of Souls), hashing out what the film is going to be (with a ton of stuff just too crazy, some of which ended up being sequences in ToD). The amazing thing that comes through is that the ‘Berg keeps pushing for just looney-toons levels of crazy action sequences, while Lucas keeps saying to him “yeah, but to make this thing work, it HAS to stay grounded and believable on some level”.

      • June 23, 2016 at 1:20 am

        Nuke the fridge is all Lucas.

        • June 23, 2016 at 11:59 am

          No, the Prairie Dogs and fridge was Spielberg. Lucas was the monkeys.

          • June 23, 2016 at 4:57 pm

            Nope, Lucas tried to convince Steven that the fridge was plausible by creating a dossier about the supposed survivabilty of being inside a fridge during a nuclear blast. Spielberg finally relented, and then took the blame for Lucas when everyone made fun of it.

          • June 24, 2016 at 1:47 am

            Oh well, it’s definitely not the most unrealistic thing he’s survived in the series.

          • June 25, 2016 at 7:59 am

            wow, another person blaming Lucas whilst apologising for everyone else. taking credit that Lucas deserves and re-distributing it to others whilst keeping all blame purely on Lucas shoulders is getting really old. TROLLS.

          • June 25, 2016 at 8:04 am

            Apologizing? No, just stating facts. Sorry you have such a hard time accepting them. Now go light another candle on your Lucas shrine and praise the sacred Creator of Jar Jar Binks poop and fart humor.

          • June 23, 2016 at 8:22 pm

            I don’t get the hate for the prarie dogs honestly. One shows up as the Paramount logo then runs away, then they’re in literally two shots, one as they turn their heads to watch the rocket sled, and one as Indy stumbles off the thing. They don’t engage in digital shenanigans, they don’t do anything out of character for a groundhog, and they are in so little of the film as to be completely forgettable

          • June 23, 2016 at 10:22 pm

            Not characteristic of the series at all.

        • June 23, 2016 at 8:20 pm

          Except the fridge is a recurring Speilberg theme.

        • June 25, 2016 at 7:57 am

          no it isnt, idiot. the nuke the fridge sh*t is ALL SPEILBERG. He has said this in interviews multiple times.

    • June 22, 2016 at 8:29 pm

      Everyoneone forgets that Spielberg directed Crystal Skull, Kathleen Kennedy and Frank Marshall produced it and Koepp wrote. Yet you have no probelm with these people but Lucas.

      • June 23, 2016 at 1:13 am


      • June 23, 2016 at 1:52 am

        I didn’t just blame Lucas for Indy 4.

      • June 25, 2016 at 7:56 am

        one of the stupidist things in history, the indy in the fridge scene, had nothing from GL. it was ALL SPEILBERG. He said it himself. but GL still gets all the hate.

        • June 25, 2016 at 4:38 pm

          Well I’m not surprised it was a Spielberg’s idea. I do’nt think Lucas is that incensitive. Not only, even a toddler knows a fridge won’t protect you from a nuclear blast but it also diminish the horror of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by trying to making it easily escapable by entering a fridge. This movie also happenned in a moment where the US was seriously considering a nuclear strike on Iran. To me it was shameless war propaganda. Lucas is a humanist, anti-totalitarian, Spielberg is the opposite, he’s a propaganda agent for American imperialism. Saving Private Ryan was a big recruitment tool for the military for the wars that were coming.
          Spielberg thinks dropping nukes on people is funny, but I wonder how he would react if someone had made jokes about gas chamber by showing you could escape from them by putting a cloth on your nose.

  • June 22, 2016 at 8:30 pm

    They only want George Lucas stamp to get back the loyal fans.

    • June 22, 2016 at 10:54 pm

      Nonsense. The ‘loyal fans’ are the stupid people who have somehow over the years convinced themselves that Gary Kurzt made Star Wars and that mean ol’, stupid, poopy-pants Mr Lucas just took all the credit.

      • June 23, 2016 at 12:36 am

        That’s not the loyal fans, that’s the current crowd that is seeking forward to this movie. I mean loyal to Lucas.

      • June 23, 2016 at 6:28 am

        It was a team of more than just Lucas who made the original films so great. You’re definitely right though in that without Lucas there would be no Indy or Star Wars as we know it today.

        • June 23, 2016 at 11:58 am

          No it was all Lucas, with a little amount of creative input from his wife. The same applies to Raiders of the Lost Ark.

          Then Marcia tried to take all the credit, and all of Lucas’ money.

          • June 23, 2016 at 8:19 pm

            It was a team, with Lucas as the driving force who spent the years in research and prepping, and then kinda thorugh sheer bloody stubbornness and personal risk, forced things like ILM into creation to make it happen. The ‘loyal fans’ though have floated everything from it was really all Marcia, to it was really all Kurtz – ANYTHING, just as long as in their world Lucas is a greedy idiot hack who just rode their coattails.

          • June 25, 2016 at 7:55 am

            thank you! EXACTLY. i think the worst part is how much “loyal fans” try to give Lawrence Kasdan credit. He wrote the script for Raiders off of LUCAS’ STORY. He re-wrote a draft of Empire originally written by Leigh Brackett and Lucas off of LUCAS’ STORY. He co-wrote Jedi with Lucas based off of LUCAS STORY. he is a glorified script doctor, who, when freed from Lucas’ “creative handcuffs”, literally made TFA a REMAKE OF LUCAS STORY coz he couldnt figure out one himself.

          • June 23, 2016 at 9:32 pm

            I’m talking about creating the looks of everything. George had a vision, his wife had input, so did Gary Kurtz, so did Kasdan. Lucas chose what he thought looked the best as far as what the creature departments and costume departments made. He may have chosen what he thought represented his vision the best but he didn’t actually make everything you see on screen.

          • June 23, 2016 at 10:21 pm

            All these people helped Lucas make Star Wars great:
            Ralph McQuarrie
            John Williams
            Gary Kurtz
            Ben Burtt
            Joe Johnston
            Dennis Muren
            Phil Tippett
            Richard Edlund
            John Dykstra
            Ken Ralston
            Lorne Peterson
            Roger Christian
            John Mollo
            Stuart Freeborn
            Paul Hirsch/Richard Chew/Marcia Lucas

          • June 24, 2016 at 1:45 am

            I’m referring to the story, not the execution.

  • June 22, 2016 at 8:50 pm

    I missed the last 3 words of that headline and was all hopeful for a moment

  • June 22, 2016 at 8:56 pm

    Geek culture, the home of vocal and loud minorities in which reside and I quote Kevin Feig – “some of the biggest a-holes in the world” (despite how a lot of these people were the same ones being bullied back in the 70’s and 80’s due to liking geeky stuff and now, they’re doing the same stuff to others, especially towards younger people. Talk about hypocrisy!)

  • June 22, 2016 at 9:33 pm

    I have suddenly lost all interest in this movie.

    • June 23, 2016 at 9:33 am

      Thank you for being part of the problem.

      • June 23, 2016 at 10:03 am

        Yep, I have significant influence over the quality of the movie.

  • June 22, 2016 at 9:38 pm

    Is George Lucas wearing a, “Han Shot First,” shirt in that first picture?!?!

    • June 22, 2016 at 10:51 pm

      He’s had it for years. He be trollin’ hard, and you’ve gotta love him for it.

      • June 23, 2016 at 1:23 am

        It actually makes him as petty as the OOT fans on the internet, because it shows that he knows about their complaint and that he actually cares.

        It’s sad that the creator of SW disdains the fanbase that built his empire, and vice versa. There is so much ill will that fans don’t want Lucas involved in future SW films. And then Lucas makes comments after TFA about Disney being White Slavers.

        I feel sad for him because he’s actually let a minority voice on the internet affect him and the SW universe.

        • June 23, 2016 at 3:41 am

          I don’t find it that sad that he’s not more considerete to those who call him a childhood-rapist hack, whose success is a fluke. He’s right to tease them.

          • June 23, 2016 at 8:14 pm

            Bingo. If I had as much vile, nasty, and extremely PERSONAL hatred flung my way because people didn’t like some movies I made, I would troll those fuckers HARD.

        • June 23, 2016 at 6:25 am

          He took back those statements though and apologized for even saying them, I believe he did at least.

          I’m pretty sure he was just upset that Star Wars was doing so well without his involvement and took the blow to a personal level when he shouldn’t have.

          • June 24, 2016 at 3:22 am

            Lololol come on man, get it together. Did you actually watch the interview? He said it in a joking tone, meaning “corporation.” George always hated studios. He acknowledged Disney as the best.

            B. His tone had nothing to do with “star wars doing great”. It had everything to do with Kathy and Jar Jar making a completely unoriginal remake. He SAYS THIS IN THE INTERVIEW. He says that star wars films have always been about creativity and new ideas (even the less than well received ones) and

          • June 24, 2016 at 11:19 am

            I’ll admit, I never watched the interview I’m just going off what I heard. Lucas just said “It’s what the fans wanted, but not what he would have done.” Is what I gathered.

          • June 25, 2016 at 7:51 am

            fair enough. that comment is what kathy kennedy said George said after he saw it the first time. but in the interview itself ( ) he pretty much says what i paraphrased above.

          • June 24, 2016 at 11:36 am

            It’s not Lucas’s decision to decide what’s best for Star Wars any more, and I believe attracting to as wide an audience as possible besides just hardcore fans who want the perfect Star Wars film is the best way to keep Star Wars alive. If you keep most of the fans happy while still attracting new fans, isn’t that pretty much a win win for just about everyone?

          • June 25, 2016 at 7:42 am

            except that we’re currently living in a world where the OT-fanboy generation (who are pre-dispositioned to love TFA) are running most media outlets. Whilst it has been widely reported that TFA is “beloved by fans” etc, from what ive gathered, the fanbase is actually far more split in half. so MOST of the fans arent happy id say.

            its like (excuse my sh*t analogy) 100 people in a room, 53 happy, 47 sad, but the microphones only in the hands of the happy people, so therefore, the perception is that everyone in the room is happy.

          • June 27, 2016 at 5:49 am

            I guarantee you it’s more like 75 like 25 dislike, with the microphone in the like’s hands and the internet in the dislike’s hands.

          • June 27, 2016 at 10:46 am

            i think we’ll have to disagree about ratio’s personally. its probs more like 60/65 – 40/35 . which is fine i guess, but thats also counting people who you’d classify as “random audiences”, not actual star wars fans. if you only counted people that were star wars fans, it would be 50-50. honestly, in talking to people who were star wars fans before TFA came out (and not counting casual audiences) i find that only the real prequel haters/ OT fanatics love TFA. most others are far more mixed-to-negative about it, but once again, the microphones are in the hands of the OT generation.

          • June 28, 2016 at 7:19 am

            I will say that I think TFA is a fun and entertaining movie that is above average compared to most other films. So I’d give it a solid 8.5 rating out of 10. I’m not biased to say it’s the greatest Star Wars movie ever and I’m not biased to say it’s the worst Star Wars movie ever. I’m not expecting to change your opinion but just understand or be open to my thinking as I am perfectly capable of understanding why you and a few others would dislike this film.

            To me having the “microphone” makes no difference, you’re either going to have a positive, neutral/mixed, or negative outlook on the movie regardless of what the media tells you or the internet. I’ve never been swayed on an opinion on how I feel about something after watching it except for if it gets played a million times by someone in my family and I can’t stand to watch it anymore. I’ve only ever had my opinion swayed on whether or not to spend money on something or not.

            I think your perception of the general outlook of TFA is definitely biased towards the more negative outlook that you see on a lot of the comments on web sites. We both should know that comments and close friends are not a reasonable estimation for how well liked a movie is overall, we’d be getting a very narrow view of how well liked or disliked a movie is. What’s the best way to see how people in general feel about a movie available to the general public? Review sites!

            So looking at imdb, rottentomatoes(which many people hate) and metacritic we see that overall the movie was viewed with a pretty positive outcome. If you are a person that doesn’t care about the critic’s sscores because you think they are paid or whatever the excuse we’ll ignore them in this case. Even the most cynical and harsh of the sites would be Metacritic’s user scores, and even after comparing all of the Star Wars films TFA still beats out The Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones. If you compare imdb’s scores then it becomes the fourth best. If you count the critic’s scores then TFA jumps way up to being the third best on Metacritic.

            So, unless you have a better way of using statistics or whatever of finding out how well people like films that’s the best way I can think of doing it.

            Also, the OT is far more favorable and has far more fans than the Prequels, imo. I have no concrete proof on that but I believe it to be so. It only makes sense why Lucasfilm made TFA to cater to the OT fans far more than the prequel fans. It is a business after all.

          • June 28, 2016 at 10:42 am

            Okay, lets get this clear first: im 24. Star wars PT generation by age, not by film love. V. IV. III. VI. (VII). I. II.

            of course theyre gonna try to cater to OT fans. the OT is also the closest to VII timeline wise. But i f**king reject the notion that the only way you can appease to fans of the OT is by remaking episode IV. Sure its the easiest way. But taking the easy way and risking the art for $$$


            makes them COWARDS, especially when it has such a negative impact on both past and future star wars films.

            look. i think you like to view this as a film and a business. I understand the business side. i get it. why do you think a studio would rather bank their money on a remake than an original film? SAFE BETS MAKE MONEY. i get it.

            i just think that in this context, business shouldnt be a consideration for someone watching the movie. ive seen the last 6 pieces of star wars art, im in the cinema with piece #7. and it sucks. i dont care why JJ, disney or LF decided to make it sucks, i only care that it sucks.

          • June 29, 2016 at 11:14 am

            I’m 26 and it doesn’t suck though, just in your mind it does. All of your reasons you listed in a previous post. I can argue and debate every single one with a counter against them as to why I think it’s still good.

            Howevet, the truth comes down to what you wanted to see in the first sequel to RoTJ and apparently it failed miserably at every aspect except execution and the technical aspects.

            I thought it was a solid first film without help from Lucas, but even if Lucas had directed episode 7, it most likely would have been even worse than what we got with Abrams. Unless you are one of those people who thinks Lucas, the maker, can do no wrong. I appreciate what Lucas has envisioned and what he’s given the world, he’s just past his prime.

          • June 30, 2016 at 7:51 am

            “it doesn’t suck though, just in your mind it does”. Look man i loved this debate we’re having, but then you do the exact same thing you accuse me of and assume that your opinion is the right one. In YOUR OPINION, it is a solid first entry. In your opinion. There is just as much hate for The Force Awakens now as there is love, and if you want an explanation for it, i have a theory.

            (People went in to TFA with “prequel-goggles” on. Undoubtably TFA fixed the prequel flaws like CGI and dialogue and acting, so people (and reviewers, who because of Disney withholding press screenings until the premiere had no time to get over their “prequel-goggles” before reviewing the film) initially thought they loved it. Theory over.)

            Agree about Lucas as a director, and even a writer. As a creative visionist, as a storyteller, he still has much more ability than JJ. I would argue that JJ doesnt have a prime. He never has. The best work he has ever produced (Lost, not including the final season) was actually made by other people. He was just a producer on season 1A) Therefore he chooses to take other peoples ideas and rehash them. He is not a “visionary”, he is not an “auteur”, he is a “mimic-er”. He is the film version of James Brolins character from “hail Caesar.” He is a studio fix-it man who comes onto beloved properties created by auteurs, makes a watered down version of the cool-aid designed to be tasteable by the broadest audience possible.

            Look man, we can go around in circles for days, but at the end of the day, its just our opinions. You like it, i think its a piece of sh*t. Lets just agree that hopefully Rian Johnson comes in with an original good film, yes?

          • June 30, 2016 at 11:52 am

            I have faith in Rian. I just get defensive when people talk crap about things I love and I am passionate about. That’s really it for me. I have loved Star Wars since I was a kid, and even TFA with all its flaws and even the prequels and especially the OT I have a special place in my heart for. I am very active on these boards and trust me it’s not just you I disagree and debate with.

          • June 25, 2016 at 7:46 am

            whilst i can understand the “widest audience possible point (especially for a studio), ive always believed that staying true to vision is far more important than attracting a wider audience.

            Its like the new Star Trek. i like the new star trek films, but i shouldnt.

            I have always HATED star trek. I never got it. it wasnt for me. but thats okay, because it was for someone, and im glad that they had it. But then JAR JAR Abrams came along and watered down what it was, making it appealing for a broad range of people. at the same time, he sort of ruined the essence of what star trek actually was.

            i would rather see the truest vision of the star wars saga told in GOOD FILMS then see a watered down franchise. but thats me personally.

          • June 27, 2016 at 5:59 am

            That makes sense and I understand why somebody like you might not like it, however, they were always going to play it kinda safe with the first film under Disney so it was always intended to be this sort of OT greatest hits movie, with some new stuff thrown in.

            I knew what type of film we were getting for the most part, and therefore I wasn’t disappointed or surprised to see what we got.

            Following what you said about keeping true to the source. I feel like Star Wars did exactly that, maybe too well. If Abrams was responsible for making Star Trek more Star Wars and liked by general audiences, and he made TFA the same as the other Star Wars movies.

            That’s basically a win win, the OT fans get what they wanted all along, the new audiences get a movie that’s entertaining to watch and they don’t know how similar it is to the older films since they haven’t seen the others thereby bringing in even more fans. The only fans that would be disappointed are the fans who loved the prequels the most, and they are in an extreme minority. So, it’s a no brainer why TFA came out like it did.

          • June 27, 2016 at 11:09 am

            i disagree about some of your points tbh.

            its a win win for Disney, and for LF. But that DOESNT mean its a win for star wars, or for filmmaking.

            onto that star trek thing. sure JJ made it more likeable and better for a “broader audience”, but he also destroyed the essence of what star trek was in order to do it, and a large percent of that fanbase hate him for it. Star Trek and Into Darkeness arent even star trek films. they are star wars/generic blockbuster ripoffs with star trek things IN THEM.

            honestly, the reaction in the media reminded me of this little youtube gem i attached:

            JJ and Disney are the empire. the holonet is proclaiming them the saviors of the galaxy, as is a bunch of people yet to understand the ramifications of allowing the modern trend of “remake filmmaking” to penetrate the franchise.

            given a few decades, i ultimately feel the franchise will recognise this.

            i honestly dont think TFA kept to the source. TFA ISNT ACTUALLY LIKE ANH. like, on a superficial level it did, in the sense that it took the script from ANH, and just inserted the obvious star wars ships, droids, characters and “things” into it (ie the opening crawl, music). just like the star trek reboots. but the truth is, if you look at what star wars films have aimed and achieved over the last few decades, TFA is actually against the spirit of everything star wars stands for. GL said it perfectly in that interview. Star wars has always been about exploring new ideas, new characters, ORIGINALITY whilst echo-ing similar themes. TFA explores similar characters, the SAME IDEAS, whilst directly lifting the same themes. Fundamentally different.

            also, i honestly think youre kinda wrong to break the fandom up into OT and PT. im someone who grew up in the prequel era, yet ask me to rank star wars films before TFA?

            V. IV. III. VI. I. II.

            i think that whilst a lot of OT fans that were just looking at TFA on a superficial level (give me more realism! witty dialogue! Han Solo acting like a pirate despite the growth the showed in the OT to become a war general! things that look like the OT!) but a lot of the fanbase detest the fact that we waited over 30 years for a sequel only to get a muddled piece of garbage. we just dont have a voice at the moment, and everyone in hollywood and the media doesnt want to blow their chance to participate in star wars future in order to call them out on it.

            agree to disagree i guess?

          • June 28, 2016 at 8:09 am

            Win win for Lucasfilm, Disney, all Star Wars OT fans, not prequel fans or heavily invested lore fans. Not Star Wars? What do you mean by that, and filmmaking? Why because it had a predictable and too similar of a story to the OT? TFA did a splendid job on a technical level just as well if not better than the other films except for maybe the story. Which I’ll agree is the weakest aspect of the film. There will still excellent moments though. I’m not expecting to change your mind or anything like that but all I ask is to understand my pov and see why I enjoyed TFA and don’t see it as a bad film, here goes….

            I’m not really a star Trek fan so I have no opinion on anything Star Trek related. I get the gist though that hardcore Star Trek fans didn’t like the Abrams Star Trek movies especially Into Darkness, and that general audiences loved them.

            I think the differences between us mostly stem from that I consider the business pov as well as the fan pov, as well as the art critic pov. I realize that the burden to make a new Star Wars film without direct input from Lucas himself makes it incredibly stressful and difficult to make a good movie as well as being the first movie under new ownership where a lot of the future success is counting on the first. We both know they could never had pleased everyone too. Another point I’d like to make is the difference in approach to this film. Good examples are TFA and Warcraft to show what I mean. TFA went a very general audience approach, Warcraft went a very fan heavy approach that confuses regular audiences but the fans know everything about the characters already and they would enjoy it more than the confused general audiences, so did BvS, both of those films didn’t do nearly as well as TFA although, Star Wars probably has a much larger fan base. Abrams could have went the fan heavy approach but he didn’t. So, I don’t blame him or Lucasfilm for making a bad film, I Praise them for their success. I take that into consideration and I’m not as critical as other people are, like you. I’m also probably just more optimistic in general which I can’t change, and I won’t change you.

            I believe you only consider the fan and art critic pov, even though a lot of the critics enjoyed the film, but to a hardcore fan of star Wars not just the OT fans, TFA did really very little to build on the existing lore. If you’re a lore fan then TFA was a poor film. They introduced an Imperial Remnant group with a giant more powerful death star, as well as a few new characters that played off some existing archetypes already seen in Star Wars, except for maybe Finn.

            You brought up the remake trend. I enjoy a lot of the remakes although not all of them are great. If you hate remakes then, I see why you’d hate TFA, or the Star Treks. Hating remakes is already going to make you biased towards disliking TFA, since it was very much an OT greatest hits film, you’ve probably gathered that that doesn’t bother me at all. In a few decades they may not even be making Star Wars movies anymore and could eventually reboot everything all over again, who knows?

            I saw a different interview with George Lucas where he said the Star Wars meaning is about the psychological motifs that have been around forever and are now being recycled in a more modern way. He also said it’s basically about there being one god throughout the ages where the only thing different is the expression of that god (aka. the force) I don’t know how he got that from what Star Wars is about but here you go if you don’t believe me. He did write most of it with help from others like his first wife.

            The fandom is definitely mixed but there are fans that love just the OT and hate PT, fans who like the prequels more and think the OT are boring, and fans who like it all no matter what, and fans who prefer the OT over the PT but still like a majority of it (that’s me), and fans who really want Star Wars to be super mature, dark and gritty. So, I don’t think I’m too far off with saying the fans can be split into groups.

            Like I said earlier I understand your POV and why you might not like TFA, but I think you are too critical of it. You could say that maybe I’m not critical enough, but what does being super critical get you? Draining, to everybody else.

            “Critical people are often not aware that they are being critical, because their criticisms are a projection of their own issues onto someone else. So, if they’re already unwilling to engage in self-awareness, chances are you lashing out at them is not going to change that.”

            Which I need to learn to do better too.

          • June 28, 2016 at 10:24 am

            Okay, a few things.

            I definately sympathise and understand with both the expectations/stress of the filmmakers, and the business POV issues involved. I AM A FILMMAKER. Sure, not any where near the level being discussed, but still. I f**king get it bro. but as a member of the audience, i don’t go into the cinema, AND SHOULDN’T, giving a f**k about studio or business considerations. I have six pieces of art ive seen previously, i’ve got the seventh piece of the collection in front of me, and thats what i should be focused on. If anything, your point of view actually hinders your ability to properly judge art.

            So honestly, as a filmmaker, whilst technical quality, cinematography, sound, EVERYTHING YOU SEE ON SCREEN is 100% going through my brain.

            ——And to be clear, on a technical level, TFA is the best star wars film so far——

            BUT that accounts for 20% of my critical thinking. the most important thing, the thing that dictates 80% of a film’s quality is the STORY and CREATIVE/ARTISTIC VISION.

            And to be honest, I really reject the notion that i was in anyway predispositioned to hate TFA. I love remakes, when done well. Its always about being able to justify them with me. i even gave props to that critically panned Point Blank remake, coz it least it tried something new and told its story in an interesting (but poorly executed) way.

            The fact is, whilst its material is more relake-then-sequel, this ISNT ACTUALLY A REMAKE, it is MARKETED AS EPISODE VII. that means it is instantly an accountable piece of a puzzle that needs to justify its existance. It will have a ripple affect on both the way we view the story telling, characters, and mythology of both previous films, and future films. Considering we had a perfectly rounded saga, with each film (no matter how good or bad) an essential piece of the puzzle, this film had a lot on its shoulders.

            i went in REALLY EASY TO PLEASE. All this film had to do was address three simple pieces of criteria, and even if the film had looked as bad as Attack of the Clones, or a character went on a monologue about sand, i would have walked out with a smile on my face.

            – Give me a reason, why in the context of the star wars saga, this film needs to exist. George Lucas, in 6 films, created a fully rounded saga that needed no addition. So give me a reason why episode VII is a missing piece to the puzzle I HAD TO KNOW.
            FAIL. I was not given any reason why this film needed to exist in the overall star wars saga other that “because $$$$$”

            – Honor what came before.

            -Follow the trajectory of what GL set up through his use of the ying yang concept.
            FAIL. This film completely ignores the star wars story tradition of picking up on character and story trajectory set by the previous trilogy, resulting change THROUGH a trilogy, then setting it on a new path.

            Anyways, my problem with VII, the reason why i can’t give it any sort of loving, is because as both a piece of the star wars film saga, and as the start of a new trilogy, this film had a responsibility to set a story path, tone, and creative vision that was unique in its own right whilst honoring the story paths, characters etc that have come before. This film, IMO, fails in this regard.

            This film doesn’t do anything new. It doesnt add anything new. It is a redundant film that seems to be saying “we’re doomed to repeat our past”, and im sorry, but that is a disgrace. and i refuse to alter my truth based on other factors like “business POV’s”. It all about the art, man. and this art sucks. There is no justification in the film why it needs to exist other than $$$$$$$, and as i believe the film undercuts the greatest franchise and mythology of all time, your damn right im gonna be critical. Those who bow down to our new Imperial overlords are actually doing star wars and the fandom a disservice in the long run.

            And if people like me dont speak up against TFA, the LF think theyve made a beloved hit. if they dont see our point of view, theyll just want to keep going on the path that they started on. and the idea of more films of this quality, of this method… it makes me sad.

            i guess we’ll have to agree to disagree.

            “this is how liberty dies… with thunderous applause.”

          • June 29, 2016 at 11:05 am

            Seriously critic. TFA mimics just as much as Episode 1. But episode 1 gets a pass? The aesthetic of TFA just looks more OT because it is a sequel.

            You’re right about the marketing it was marketed as a total sequel but it ended up being a requel. I knew this going in though, apparently you didn’t. So therefore your disappointment of what the film ended up being ruined it for you. That’s your own fault, nobody else. To be fair too, they never put Episode 7 on the posters or the marketing. So that was strange to see.

            I don’t consider a film to be good just because it tells a good story. Sure, having a good script will help, but 80% is way too high its more like 50%. A good script but with a bad director will be average at best. A bad script with a good director will still be bad but maybe watchable.

            Context of this film is to introduce new characters to tell the story over three movies. The passing of the torch so to speak from the old characters to the new. That is TFA’s main and pretty much sole purpose. I guess I’ll just end with I’m sorry you were disappointed and I hope you’ll watch the sequels despite disliking TFA.

          • June 30, 2016 at 8:03 am

            okay man, i gotta call bulls**t. Did you even watch these films?

            TPM did copy ANH in overall structure, the difference is that whilst the broad strokes are familiar, the details are all strikingly different and “NEW.” The occasional scene is a homage to something we saw in ANH, but most things are new. Yes, we return to Tattooine, but the other planets are new.

            TFA mimics characters, structures, DIRECT SCENES ARE RIPPED OFF (hmmm… ‘homage’) from ANH, and every planet is a ripoff of something we have seen before “Jakku = tattooine. starkiller is death star on hoth. if Leia and Luke kept walking for ten more minutes on endor in ROTJ, they would have come across Maz’ castle. come on.)

            cool well we have our own percentages then. I think we have strikingly different views of films. you seem like more like the transformers crowd as opposed to me. and that fine.

            look, as soon as Jar jar became attached i suspected a remake, i suspected “shit.” but you seem to be saying that my expectations justify my feelings about the film. No.

            Whatever man, i feel like this: “Context of this film is to introduce new characters to tell the story over three movies. The passing of the torch so to speak from the old characters to the new. That is TFA’s main and pretty much sole purpose.” is bullshit. sure that is all a massive component, but if you actually think that is only acheivable by remaking ANH, then you honestly dont understand films or filmmaking. Im not saying this to be mean, its just the truth. Everything you listed could have been acheived in an original way. They chose to take an easy way out.

            Look at it this way. imagine if john lennon and george harrison were still alive. imagine if the beatles got back together and announced a new album. youd be stoked. now imagine if it was marketed as “A NEW ALBUM”, but when you get the album, and put it in, you realise that its actually a greatest hits album with 2 new tracks at the end. sure youd be stoked about the 2 new songs, but youd also be really guttered. that is how TFA felt to me and a lot of people. You might have liked it, but please at least tell me you understand and get why we all feel this way.

            Anyways, all good man, hopefully i love rian johnsons episode 7 (for me) and you enjoy his episode 8.

          • June 30, 2016 at 11:56 am

            Well you can call bullshit as much as you want but Abrams, Kennedy, and Kasdan, even Bob Iger all pretty much agree that’s what TFA is.
            It’s meant to be a homage to the OT, or a direct ripoff like you say, and also serve as a set up for the next sequels, while passing the torch along the way. If you don’t believe that, then that’s your problem.

          • June 30, 2016 at 8:05 am

            ill leave it at this my friend. i have far more respect for someone that takes a swing and misses, then someone who doesnt swing at all. GL might have made unpopular prequels, but at least he swung his bat. JJ didnt take a swing.

          • June 30, 2016 at 12:02 pm

            Which is exactly what JJ is good at. It seems to me that you just don’t like JJ Abrams in general, because you think he’s a hack, untalented, uncreative, unoriginal director which naturally would carry over as a bias against his films. That’s fine if you think that but I apparently don’t apply criticism as much as you do. I’m not wanting to be a movie critic like you seem to want to be. I did enjoy the first and third Transformers but disliked the second and fourth if that’s worth anything. I watch movies for entertainment, as well as for quality/style. I’d still enjoy a well made movie even if it had a crappy story, and I’d probably dislike a poorly directed movie with a really good story.

          • June 29, 2016 at 11:21 am

            James Cameron hates everything that isn’t James Cameron related.

            I don’t care what other directors think of films they weren’t involved in. If James Cameron wants to make a Star Wars film, all the more power to him, but when the fans come crashing down his door how his Star Wars film isn’t Star Wars and you see “10 reasons why James Cameron’s Star Wars film sucks” then I would laugh hysterically.

          • June 30, 2016 at 8:06 am

            Well James Cameron likes star wars films that werent made by JJ, so how does he hate everything that isnt James Cameron related?

          • June 30, 2016 at 12:08 pm

            Everybody who likes Star Wars likes the OT. That’s a given, do you think Cameron likes the PT?

            He’s just a jealous and self centered guy, that’s how he comes across at least, not to say he hasn’t made some entertaining films though.

            I was mostly joking too. I know it doesn’t always come across that way over the internet.

        • June 27, 2016 at 11:11 pm

          a minority on the internet? I wouldn’t call almost a billion people a minority..LMAO umm sorry buddy…pretty much every fan of star wars hates that scene…I hate to be the one to break it to you…but the PT lovers are the real minority. The Force Awakens is your proof . and so will 8 and of these days it will sink in to you all that the PT was terrible…the rest of the world figured it out years ago…wtf is your problem already??? even kathleeen Kennedy cracks jokes about the prequels for crying out loud.

  • June 23, 2016 at 1:45 am

    This has me gobsmacked. What’s he going to do if he’s retired? Pitch ideas? From recent interviews, It seems like he could care less about filmmaking at this point in his life.

    I hope they make it or set It in Oceania as it’s the only continent in the world other than the Arctic where one of the films hasn’t been made on.

    • June 23, 2016 at 3:39 am

      Hundreds of films have taken place and/or been shot in Australia and New Zealand, the largest countries on Oceania.

      • June 23, 2016 at 2:42 pm

        Yes but no Indy films.

  • June 23, 2016 at 2:56 am

    This new blocking feature by Disqus is great!!

    • June 23, 2016 at 3:38 am

      After two years, I can finally use Disqus again!

  • June 23, 2016 at 3:01 pm

    Lucas was the one who ruined the script for the Indiana Jones 4. It is 33 years now since he last made a half decent movie. The one thing he really excels at is bringing the right people together who are really good at making films. So just don’t give him any kind of creative control, Steven, and the next Indie flick might actually be sorta good.

    • June 23, 2016 at 5:19 pm


      • June 23, 2016 at 7:15 pm

        Have a good time in La-La-Land if you can’t stand differing opinions.

        • June 24, 2016 at 1:34 am

          Your opinion is wrong. Further, I strongly suspect it’s not actually your opinion, but someone else’s that you’ve borrowed because it comes across as a bit of broken telephone. I can only assume you’re referring to the Darabont draft when you say ‘screenplay’, as no other drafts have come to light. Have you actually ever READ the thing? It’s terrible. It’s full of clumsy, unearned, and illogical fan-service callbacks, a tin-ear for both what Marion and Indy sound like (Darabont wrote Indy as some kind of Bogart Sam Spade character, and Marion as some upper class bitch), action sequences that sound more like the awful platforming level from some shitty video game, and a, I shit you not, sequence where Indy is swallowed by a snake. Spielberg liked it as a first draft (note, he specifically says “a first draft”, not a script that was ready to shoot), but honestly, I find his judgement on action/adventure awfully suspect lately.

          • June 24, 2016 at 5:15 pm

            Yes, I actually read the script, and comparing it with the one they used in the terrible Crystal Skull movie, it is WAY better.
            Before filming started, Ford, Kennedy and Spielberg were fond of the draft they got to read, but Lucas wanted to make big changes. It was Lucas who insisted on his own ideas. They others definitely are to blame because they rather wanted to make another flick than to wait another 10 years of arguing.
            Sure, this is speculation on some parts, but looking at the terrible ideas and their execution that Lucas made in the last decades, it is not an unlikely one. Of course SW I-III were terrible movies, but even if you like those there’s no way you can defend atrocities like “Red Tails” or the stupid fairy flick he last made. It is no question that Lucas is a terrible film maker, whose greatest achievements were only possible because more experienced and talented film makers corrected him. Every movie he ever touched as the sole creative mastermind was a disaster.

            It is only one possible interpretation, but all these clues add up to the idea that Lucas today should be as far away from every idea he ever had as possible.

    • June 25, 2016 at 5:08 pm

      I disagree that it’s “very good”, I read the Darabont script that leaked and it’s still got a lot of the goofy stuff people talk about in the movie .. The whole stupid intro with the nuclear test etc. It’s largely the same beats with a few notable tweaks.

Comments are closed.