Star Wars: reboot/remake?

[Eltab]

Setting a movie during the Prequel Trilogy, the story interacting with the (deliberate but secret) sabotage of the Republic's institutions. The heroes overcome the threat du jour even though The Authorities did little / nothing to help. All-new characters, never goes close to Tattooine or Trantor err excuse me the capital planet/city. Maybe cameo Tarkin in a low level of responsibility, chafing at orders that prevent decisive action ... and ignores them to follow his own judgement. (This is when the bad guys start chasing the heroes for serious.)

 

[ccs]

Maybe I should rephrase. Not new film. New franchise.

As in new SW franchise? Or not SW at all?

 

[ccs]

I'm not a fan (at all) of rebooting iconic characters with new actors. The new Trek films were OK on their own, and the actors did as well as they could be expected to do, but Leonard Nimoy is Spock; William Shatner is Kirk, etc.

Have you actually thought this stance through though?
What about for characters like Robin Hood, Hamlet, etc? Flash Gordon? James Bond? Assorted comic book characters, say Batman?
I mean, without recasting these rolls you don't tell any new stories of these characters/expose them to new audiences.
And what happens when the actor playing one of these rolls quits, gets fired, ages out of the role (seriously, Arnies NOT the Terminator he once was....), or dies - but you've still got stories to tell?

 

[Zardnaar]

Have you actually thought this stance through though?
What about for characters like Robin Hood, Hamlet, etc? Flash Gordon? James Bond? Assorted comic book characters, say Batman?
I mean, without recasting these rolls you don't tell any new stories of these characters/expose them to new audiences.
And what happens when the actor playing one of these rolls quits, gets fired, ages out of the role (seriously, Arnies NOT the Terminator he once was....), or dies - but you've still got stories to tell?

They're popular due to the characters.

OT 3 are popular for a reason, recasting them is a lot more problematic.

Also see Solo. People didn't really buy into Gan being recast even if the actor did a decent enough job IMHO.

 

[ccs]

They're popular due to the characters.

Yes, that's my point. The roles occasionally require recasting.
And thank God for that or the only Batman we'd have movie wise would be his 1st pretty lame seriel from the 1940s. Hundreds of years worth of people would never experience Shakespeare beyond (maybe) reading it. Etc etc etc

OT 3 are popular for a reason, recasting them is a lot more problematic.

Yes, I agree, Hamill, Fisher & Ford were well cast. They're definitely a part of what made OT SW popular. And Ford even more so as Indiana Jones.
But they're actors, playing characters. So if one can accept that 007 & Batman get recast every few years? Then one should be able to accept that Han, Luke, Leia, & yes, Indy will all someday be played by different actors on screen.
The trick is finding actors who can pull off the look & chemistry.

And then? Just as with Bond & Batman, & whoever, we'll debate until the end of time who played the character better.

Also see Solo. People didn't really buy into Han being recast even if the actor did a decent enough job IMHO.

I did.
The main problems with Solo were 1) the guy they chose didn't do a good enough job in many peoples opinion. 2) Solo was a pretty poor movie.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I don't want a SW reboot any time soon, but...

If it did happen, and it was happening right now, I'd ignore any issues of gender or ethnicity, and cast the actors that I feel fit the feel and attitude and tone of each character best.

so,

Han - Gina Torres
Luke - Harder to say, because they gotta be young and fresh and new. Look-wise, I'd put out a call for new talent and basically look for cute, young, big wide grin and wide eyes, fairly small.
Leia - I'd basically be looking for someone like Zendaya, a younger Emma Stone, etc. Pretty, snarky, good at subtle emoting, small but good at fiery, etc.
Obi-Wan - Ming Na Wen or Oded Fehr.
Tarkin - Herzog
Vader - no change
Lando - Donald Glover

Zendaya might also make a good Luke.

I'd also probably make the whole story more gay.

But I also just...wouldn't do it, because why reboot Star Wars?

 

[pming]

Hiya!

"Absolutely not, under any circumstances should there be a 'reboot' of Star Wars".

Why?
Reasons.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

My opinion is it would be better with a hyperealistic CGI because real actors get old.

Disney can use lots of space operas by Marvel Comics, like the alien legion or the sword of the swashbucklers. Even they could talk with Paizo to produce its own Starfinder. With the open licence Disney doesn't need the lore of the Golarion/Pact Worlds.

Star Wars isn't only laser guns and duels of lightsabers but also the original trilogy was about the relations between the young adult and the patriarchal figures, symbolized by the jedis and Dark Vader. Everybody can create their own superheroes, sometimes even too powerful and powerful. Obin-wan Kenobi and master Yoda were popular because they had got something special. They were wise, and no character can be really wise but the writter/author is also. Public notices when scripters try to show characters with wise words but it's only annoying propaganda. These characters are easy to be parodied when you notice their weak points.

My advice is the first step should be some "what if" comic-strip miniserie. Later videogames, the next a cartoon serie, and finally a blockbuster animated movie.

* Other option would be a "brother IP", something like Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms, with the same races and creatures but different stories.

Or a different timeline where a group of time-travelers killed Anakin Skywalkers when he was still a baby.

 

[Mercurius]

Have you actually thought this stance through though?
What about for characters like Robin Hood, Hamlet, etc? Flash Gordon? James Bond? Assorted comic book characters, say Batman?
I mean, without recasting these rolls you don't tell any new stories of these characters/expose them to new audiences.
And what happens when the actor playing one of these rolls quits, gets fired, ages out of the role (seriously, Arnies NOT the Terminator he once was....), or dies - but you've still got stories to tell?

Yes, I have. I say, move on. We don't need another Captain Kirk or Han Solo. There are other people to tell stories about.

All of the names you mentioned were literary figures brought to film. Star Trek and Star Wars were films first and foremost, and the iconic characters forever linked with specific actors. We can discuss who the best Bond is, or which version of Batman we prefer. But there is no single actor who "made" the character. Harrison Ford "made" Han Solo; so too with William Shatner and James T Kirk, or Patrick Stewart and Jean-Luc Picard.

 

[MarkB]

We know sci-fi get old very bad. Today youngest generations miss current technology we can't see in the vintage sci-fi, for example the mobiles.

Sure, and the future as seen from now looks very different from the future envisioned in the 70s, 80s or 90s. (And in 20 years' time we'll look back and laugh at the blatant anachronisms of the futures we're imagining now). That's a reasonable argument for rebooting a franchise like, say, Bladerunner or Aliens.

But Star Wars isn't a science fiction franchise set in the future. It's a science fantasy franchise set long ago, in a galaxy far, far away. There's no need to update it by giving everyone smartcomlinks or slick high-definition GUIs on their starships.