User Avatar Image

Disney Buys Lucasfilm (and other stories)

posted by BlankCanvasDJ on - last edited - Viewed by 9.4K users

...and, by extension, LucasArts (since that's what we all really care about, I know).

http://www.benzinga.com/news/12/10/3039512/disney-to-buy-lucasfilm-for-4-05b-in-cash-and-stock

I know, with the likes of Star Wars and Indiana Jones being snatched up, the LA catalogue probably isn't a big priority but I wonder what this could mean for the future of some of our favorite adventure games?

Could a Monkey Island theme park ride be in our future? Hmm.

681 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • @Rather Dashing said: I think the difference is that the "older action star" is a very distinct kind of "old badass" thing, but Indy at various points just feels "old". He's settling down, he's sort of grumpily pulled into a younger man's adventure, and he's being the fussing dad throughout the whole thing. Indiana Jones spends a lot of that film not being an "old badass", but just being...old.

    The point, though, was that he was becoming more like his Dad. But he still had plenty of badass moments. Which is fine, because in spite of his scholarly, humorless nature, Henry Jones Sr. was also capable of being a badass at times.

    @Rather Dashing said: Star Wars should be about the story and the character interactions. It's a movie for all ages; not just a nostalgia trip for older people and not just a tool to get younger people into the franchise. Casting older actors simply as a tactic to appeal to an older demographic is a dumb reason when it comes to something like Star Wars.


    I wasn't really talking about Star Wars, just Indy. Harrison Ford really should be looking at John Wayne's career in terms of how to handle his own image.
    People my Dad's age could hardly care about Star Wars, so I agree with all of you guys on this. And the Plinkett review made a lot of good points- but that particular one is one I do not agree with.

  • @Secret Fawful said: The point, though, was that he was becoming more like his Dad. But he still had plenty of badass moments. Which is fine, because in spite of his scholarly, humorless nature, Henry Jones Sr. was also capable of being a badass at times.

    608002-henry_jones_1_super.jpg

  • Back onto LucasArts, here's a quote from the forthcoming Entertainment Weekly that's... interesting:
    [Quote]Lucasfilm’s co-chairman and soon-to-be president, Kathleen Kennedy, has told employees she wants the company to produce two or three films a year (it’s averaged fewer than four per decade), and first up is Star Wars: Episode VII for 2015, which will pick up sometime after Darth Vader gave his life to overthrow (figuratively and literally) the Emperor and save Luke in 1983’s Episode VI— Return of the Jedi. Yes, the plan is to return to the characters in the first trilogy (1977–83). Whether the original actors will have significant roles or merely be on hand to pass the baton to a new generation of actors—something Lucasfilm tried with mixed success with Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull and Disney with TRON: Legacy—is unclear.[/Quote]

  • Interesting? I call it nothing that we haven't already figured out.

  • Kathleen Kennedy has told employees she wants the company to produce two or three films a year.

    That's... that's a hell of a step up from what they've done before.

  • Is that a normal number for a production company to have?

  • @Darth Marsden said: Kathleen Kennedy has told employees she wants the company to produce two or three films a year.

    That's... that's a hell of a step up from what they've done before.

    If they're going to produce two or three films a year, why not just make a live-action, high-budget TV show and have more freedom (and time) to play around with characterization and long-arching plot elements?

  • @Alcoremortis said: If they're going to produce two or three films a year, why not just make a live-action, high-budget TV show and have more freedom (and time) to play around with characterization and long-arching plot elements?

    I think a live action Star Wars tv series is still in the works.

  • I don't really know how the industry works, but I can't picture a high-budget television show generating nearly as much income as a small handful of blockbuster films. The Star Wars license could generate more interest than usual, but it's been pretty much consistent that high-cost sci-fi shows fail because they never get enough viewers to justify the cost of production.

  • It wouldn't have to be super high budget. If it was supposed to take place around the same time as the original trilogy, I doubt anyone would really complain if it was only slightly prettier than that.

Add Comment