Jon Favreau to write, exec. produce live-action SW

PSW: discuss Star Wars without "versus" arguments.

Moderator: Vympel

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15126
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Jon Favreau to write, exec. produce live-action SW

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2018-03-15 07:47pm

Well, as Star Trek shows, at some point, a drop in quality starts to effect sales.

The question is: who and what defines "quality"? The last thing I want is for Disney to follow the pattern of "Design each new film to appease/pander to whichever group of fans whined loudest about the last film."
"Well, Grant, we've had the devil's own day, haven't we?"

"Yes. Lick 'em tomorrow though."

Generals William T. Sherman and Ulysses S Grant, the Battle of Shiloh.

User avatar
Elheru Aran
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 12343
Joined: 2004-03-04 01:15am
Location: Georgia

Re: Jon Favreau to write, exec. produce live-action SW

Post by Elheru Aran » 2018-03-15 07:53pm

Exactly, yeah. Voyager and Enterprise were a low point, culminating in Nemesis. And I'm pretty sure nobody here wants to see Wars sink that low.

As for quality... honestly yeah that is a very hard thing to define, largely because with media like Star Wars it's somewhat subjective. See all the prequel haters, for example. One thing I have to give Lucas credit for is that even with the pushback on the prequels he pretty much kept doing what he was doing and kept them pretty consistent. That's not happening with the sequels; if Star Wars IX is a redux of TFA, that's going to clash badly with TLJ, and while SW IX might be a decent movie in its own right, that would signal a decline in quality due to the lack of consistency.
It's a strange world. Let's keep it that way.

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15126
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Jon Favreau to write, exec. produce live-action SW

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2018-03-15 07:59pm

The model I'd like to see is to have the same writing/directing team, with a clear plan and overall vision, for all of a given series or stand-alone. Each separate story can do its own thing, to a point, but within a given series there should be a consistency of theme and style.

While there are many elements of TLJ that I like, I think, bluntly, that it was probably a mistake to try to do each ST film with a different director, without (it appears) a clear overall plan.

I'm hopeful, since they're talking about multi-film deals down the line with Rian Johnson and the Game of Thrones guys, that we'll get some more consistent subseries, at least.
"Well, Grant, we've had the devil's own day, haven't we?"

"Yes. Lick 'em tomorrow though."

Generals William T. Sherman and Ulysses S Grant, the Battle of Shiloh.

User avatar
ray245
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 6575
Joined: 2005-06-10 11:30pm

Re: Jon Favreau to write, exec. produce live-action SW

Post by ray245 » 2018-03-30 09:13pm

The Romulan Republic wrote:
2018-03-15 07:59pm
The model I'd like to see is to have the same writing/directing team, with a clear plan and overall vision, for all of a given series or stand-alone. Each separate story can do its own thing, to a point, but within a given series there should be a consistency of theme and style.

While there are many elements of TLJ that I like, I think, bluntly, that it was probably a mistake to try to do each ST film with a different director, without (it appears) a clear overall plan.

I'm hopeful, since they're talking about multi-film deals down the line with Rian Johnson and the Game of Thrones guys, that we'll get some more consistent subseries, at least.
The problem goes beyond having different directors. The OT can have 3 different directors but still have consistent tone and themes. You need a head at Lucasfilm that actually have a large creative vision and a clear path for the SW franchise. I've said this, again and again, Kennedy is not the person for such a role. She's a good CEO and producers of films, but she never struck me as the person that a creative vision, in the same manner, a writer or director would.

Her delegating that task to a Story group is probably the biggest mistake because there is no clear authority on who can rein in the different directors and writers with all sort of different creative vision. The fact that all 3 of the spin-offs have production issues of some kind is a good indication that no one is leading the creative vision effectively.

Kevin Feige may not be a writer of a director, but he's shown himself as someone who clearly has a clear creative vision for the MCU and what he wants from the different directors. The choice of Superhero to feature and how he is building up the MCU shows there is clearly someone heading the creative team. You need someone at the head of Lucasfilm that cares about odd little details like speeders don't have wheels and etc. Someone needs to care about the worldbuilding and also where the franchise is creatively headed.

Otherwise, you'll just get an endless supply of Star Wars stories that gets repeated constantly and goes nowhere. The old EU with never-ending Siths and Imperials is a good example of where SW is headed without proper creative leadership.
Humans are such funny creatures. We are selfish about selflessness, yet we can love something so much that we can hate something.

User avatar
Galvatron
Decepticon Leader
Posts: 6038
Joined: 2002-07-12 12:27am
Location: Kill! Smash! Destroy! Rend! Mangle! Distort!

Re: Jon Favreau to write, exec. produce live-action SW

Post by Galvatron » 2018-04-11 10:09am

I wonder if Kevin Feige himself couldn't just take on Star Wars along with the MCU. He's apparently a big fan.

I still think Dave Filoni should get the job though.

User avatar
applejack
Padawan Learner
Posts: 261
Joined: 2005-05-28 02:56am
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Contact:

Re: Jon Favreau to write, exec. produce live-action SW

Post by applejack » 2018-10-04 01:49am

Favreau's show is called The Mandalorian.

The Verge
Favreau’s live-action Star Wars show will be called The Mandalorian

But not the Mandalorian you’re thinking of
By Andrew Liptak@AndrewLiptak Oct 3, 2018, 8:20pm EDT

Jon Favreau’s live-action Star Wars TV show for Disney’s streaming service finally has a name and a plot: The Mandalorian. In a post to his official Facebook and Instagram pages, Favreau posted a brief synopsis that offers a glimpse into what we might expect for the show, which will follow a Mandalorian gunslinger in the years following Return of the Jedi.

There have been rumors in recent weeks that the show would be about the warrior culture exemplified by bounty hunters like Jango and Boba Fett. Favreau’s synopsis confirms that the show will follow one such renegade — but not, it seems Boba Fett.

Image

That’s a vague synopsis, but it fits with what’s been revealed about the show thus far. Disney tapped Favreau, who directed Iron Man, Iron Man 2, and appeared in The Clone Wars and Solo, to helm the show back in March. Production began earlier this week, teasing a familiar-looking desert planet. The Mandalorians are an incredibly popular segment of the Star Wars universe, featured in several now non-canon novels, and with a good amount of screen time during The Clone Wars.

Interestingly, Favreau already has a connection to the Mandalorians: he voiced a character named Pre Vizsla in The Clone Wars, who tried to overthrow his home planet’s government by allying himself and his followers with the Confederacy during the conflict. But the show won’t follow that character — he died during the show at the hands of Darth Maul. And while it doesn’t look like The Mandalorian will be about Boba Fett, there were reports that a film about him is in the works. Prior to Solo’s release earlier this summer, word broke that Logan director James Mangold was developing a standalone film featuring the bounty hunter.

Disney’s streaming service is expected to arrive next year, and The Mandalorian is one of several original projects that are expected to launch at the same time. Disney is also putting quite a bit of backing behind this project, which reportedly cost around $100 million for ten episodes. While Lucasfilm has launched several animated shows, an ongoing, live-action Star Wars television show hasn’t been done before, and it comes at a time when Disney has been reevaluating its tempo for pacing the franchise’s release schedule.
Dear Lord, the gods have been good to me. As an offering, I present these milk and cookies. If you wish me to eat them instead, please give me no sign whatsoever *pauses* Thy will be done *munch munch munch*. - Homer Simpson

User avatar
Galvatron
Decepticon Leader
Posts: 6038
Joined: 2002-07-12 12:27am
Location: Kill! Smash! Destroy! Rend! Mangle! Distort!

Re: Jon Favreau to write, exec. produce live-action SW

Post by Galvatron » 2018-10-04 01:31pm

Now they just need to hire Karen Traviss to write a bunch of episodes.

User avatar
applejack
Padawan Learner
Posts: 261
Joined: 2005-05-28 02:56am
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Contact:

Re: Jon Favreau to write, exec. produce live-action SW

Post by applejack » 2018-10-05 02:54am

List of directors and a photo have been released.

Engadget
Star Wars 'The Mandalorian' image, list of directors revealed
Taika Waititi, Bryce Dallas Howard and Rick Famuyiwa are all in line to direct episodes.

A day after we learned the name of the first live-action Star Wars TV show destined for Disney's unnamed subscription streaming service, the official website has posted this image of The Mandalorian. It's written and executive produced by Jon Favreau, and is expected to premiere next year.

We still don't have any details on this Boba Fett-a-like "lone gunfighter" other than their time period (between the fall of the Empire and before the rise of The First Order) and location on the outer reaches of the galaxy.

What has been revealed is an interesting list of directors. While Dave Filoni (Clone Wars) will helm the premiere, others including Taika Waititi (Thor: Ragnarok, In Shadows), Rick Famuyiwa (Dope), Bryce Dallas Howard (Solemates) and Deborah Chow (The High Cost of Living, Better Call Saul, Man in the High Castle) are also in the queue. That level of talent aligns with what we'd heard about the show's $100 million+ budget, but until the service launches next year we're probably looking at a continual slow-drip of information.

Image
Dear Lord, the gods have been good to me. As an offering, I present these milk and cookies. If you wish me to eat them instead, please give me no sign whatsoever *pauses* Thy will be done *munch munch munch*. - Homer Simpson

User avatar
Khaat
Jedi Knight
Posts: 889
Joined: 2008-11-04 11:42am

Re: Jon Favreau to write, exec. produce live-action SW

Post by Khaat » 2018-10-05 10:07am

An aside: is anyone else tired of the "dented armor" look? If you've been hit that many times, you can't be good at your job! The cloth parts are never singed, holed, frayed, or otherwise scrubby, why not just fix your armor?
(Countdown to Traviss excuse about "honor/battle scars" or some-such in 5... 4.... 3...)
Rule #1: Believe the autocrat. He means what he says.
Rule #2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule #3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule #4: Be outraged.
Rule #5: Don’t make compromises.

User avatar
KraytKing
Padawan Learner
Posts: 301
Joined: 2016-04-11 06:39pm
Location: US East Coast

Re: Jon Favreau to write, exec. produce live-action SW

Post by KraytKing » 2018-10-07 02:14pm

What you're suggesting is that if you're good, you don't wear armor, because you don't get hit. If there weren't any dents, it's either because he hasn't been shot at, or because he doesn't get hit. If the latter is true, then he should ditch it, because it isn't helping him and it's heavy.

My point being, things go wrong. It isn't necessarily a mark of poor skill, having been hit.

Also, beskar'gam is expensive and difficult to manufacture. Probably too expensive, and the damage doesn't detract significantly from it's effectiveness.
If you don't know your rights, you don't have any.

--Mace

The Old Testament has as much validity for the foundation of a religion as the pattern my recent case of insect bites formed on my ass.

--Solauren

bilateralrope
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3771
Joined: 2005-06-25 06:50pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: Jon Favreau to write, exec. produce live-action SW

Post by bilateralrope » 2018-10-07 02:29pm

Khaat wrote:
2018-10-05 10:07am
The cloth parts are never singed, holed, frayed, or otherwise scrubby, why not just fix your armor?
The cloth parts are probably much easier/cheaper to replace. Plus holes through the cloth are going to be less comfortable that surface damage to the hard surfaces of the armor.

Q99
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2043
Joined: 2015-05-16 01:33pm

Re: Jon Favreau to write, exec. produce live-action SW

Post by Q99 » 2018-10-07 02:37pm

It's much easier for high skill to determine if you hit than it is to determine if you get hit, at least if you're not a Jedi- no matter how good you are, you're the same sized targets using human (/whatever) legs for propulsion.

Mildly dented armor obviously isn't as good as fresh, but small damage like that also suggests it's still not all that near being compromised and it's still solid protection. If you're running solo, that makes sense.

User avatar
Khaat
Jedi Knight
Posts: 889
Joined: 2008-11-04 11:42am

Re: Jon Favreau to write, exec. produce live-action SW

Post by Khaat » 2018-10-08 10:30am

KraytKing wrote:
2018-10-07 02:14pm
What you're suggesting is that if you're good, you don't wear armor, because you don't get hit. If there weren't any dents, it's either because he hasn't been shot at, or because he doesn't get hit. If the latter is true, then he should ditch it, because it isn't helping him and it's heavy.

My point being, things go wrong. It isn't necessarily a mark of poor skill, having been hit.

Also, beskar'gam is expensive and difficult to manufacture. Probably too expensive, and the damage doesn't detract significantly from it's effectiveness.
My point is if you want your armor to take care of you, you take care of your armor. If you guys want to run on strawmen, I won't bite.

Tell any professionally-trained soldier he doesn't have to clean his gun until it jams in combat, I'll wait. That is what "oh, it's too much trouble to fix my kewl armor" is: an excuse by someone who doesn't understand that to a soldier (or bounty-hunter) your gear is your life and you don't skimp on it.

Also: exactly what I expected from post-Traviss Mando-wankery: "it's SOOOOOO FRIKEN AWESOME IT CAN'T BE FIXED!!!one!1!" (It was that or whiskey-voiced, "Battle scars, gotta look kewl.")
Rule #1: Believe the autocrat. He means what he says.
Rule #2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule #3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule #4: Be outraged.
Rule #5: Don’t make compromises.

User avatar
KraytKing
Padawan Learner
Posts: 301
Joined: 2016-04-11 06:39pm
Location: US East Coast

Re: Jon Favreau to write, exec. produce live-action SW

Post by KraytKing » 2018-10-08 10:45am

Oh, shove it. A set of steel from our own history is expensive and difficult to manufacture. When it's scratched, you don't resurface the whole fucking plate. When it's dented, you knock out the dents, and it still looks worse for wear. You don't replace or rebuild components to account for cosmetic damage.
If you don't know your rights, you don't have any.

--Mace

The Old Testament has as much validity for the foundation of a religion as the pattern my recent case of insect bites formed on my ass.

--Solauren

User avatar
Lord Revan
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10953
Joined: 2004-05-20 02:23pm
Location: Zone:classified

Re: Jon Favreau to write, exec. produce live-action SW

Post by Lord Revan » 2018-10-08 11:35am

KraytKing wrote:
2018-10-08 10:45am
Oh, shove it. A set of steel from our own history is expensive and difficult to manufacture. When it's scratched, you don't resurface the whole fucking plate. When it's dented, you knock out the dents, and it still looks worse for wear. You don't replace or rebuild components to account for cosmetic damage.
He could still paint over the dents and not leave them bare like that, sure it would still look worse then a new one but not as much.
I may be an idiot, but I'm a tolerated idiot
"I think you completely missed the point of sigs. They're supposed to be completely homegrown in the fertile hydroponics lab of your mind, dried in your closet, rolled, and smoked...
Oh wait, that's marijuana..."Einhander Sn0m4n

User avatar
KraytKing
Padawan Learner
Posts: 301
Joined: 2016-04-11 06:39pm
Location: US East Coast

Re: Jon Favreau to write, exec. produce live-action SW

Post by KraytKing » 2018-10-08 12:30pm

What would be the point of that. Literally useless, unless he needs the camo. In that case, he need not worry about shiny spots on his armor when his whole fucking head is like an aluminum bowl.
If you don't know your rights, you don't have any.

--Mace

The Old Testament has as much validity for the foundation of a religion as the pattern my recent case of insect bites formed on my ass.

--Solauren

Patroklos
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2361
Joined: 2009-04-14 11:00am

Re: Jon Favreau to write, exec. produce live-action SW

Post by Patroklos » 2018-10-08 01:43pm

Khaat wrote:
2018-10-08 10:30am
KraytKing wrote:
2018-10-07 02:14pm
What you're suggesting is that if you're good, you don't wear armor, because you don't get hit. If there weren't any dents, it's either because he hasn't been shot at, or because he doesn't get hit. If the latter is true, then he should ditch it, because it isn't helping him and it's heavy.

My point being, things go wrong. It isn't necessarily a mark of poor skill, having been hit.

Also, beskar'gam is expensive and difficult to manufacture. Probably too expensive, and the damage doesn't detract significantly from it's effectiveness.
My point is if you want your armor to take care of you, you take care of your armor. If you guys want to run on strawmen, I won't bite.

Tell any professionally-trained soldier he doesn't have to clean his gun until it jams in combat, I'll wait. That is what "oh, it's too much trouble to fix my kewl armor" is: an excuse by someone who doesn't understand that to a soldier (or bounty-hunter) your gear is your life and you don't skimp on it.

Also: exactly what I expected from post-Traviss Mando-wankery: "it's SOOOOOO FRIKEN AWESOME IT CAN'T BE FIXED!!!one!1!" (It was that or whiskey-voiced, "Battle scars, gotta look kewl.")
They do that because the deterioration in question (dirt and other buildup in the weapon action) is detrimental to the function of the equipment. Do you have any proof that the wear and tear on the armor in question is relevantly detrimental to its performance?

There is also a cost/benefit analysis involved. In the real world we don't overhaul military equipment due to any material defect or degradation discovered unless it is of critical importance. We routinely operate equipment with missing or degraded capabilities because 1.) Its marginal enough that we still hold an advantage over likely enemies 2.) The impact to removing that equipment entirely, even in degraded state, is greater operationally than is presented by the degradation 3.) the cost of repair is prohibitive enough that we are willing to accept the risk of the degradation 4.) The degradation is purely cosmetic or represents a failure vector not likely to be relevant during the items remaining projected life cycle ( this is often the case with coatings) 5.) The people who would be used to fix it, or the people operating it, have better things to do with their time overall.

The simple reality is that after a day in the field no solider doing real soldiering is going to be looking parade fresh. Real soldiers don't have time for looking pretty, which is why you invoking them is ridiculous. I see nothing about that armor that leads me to believe it is degraded in its primary purpose, so people with better things to do opt to do those better things.

Alos, The character wearing the armor in question has a crafted buisness personnal and reputation. There are bounty hunter/adventurer characters who make a business out of the impeccable appearance look (James Bond for instance). More often its people playing to the perception of gritty nothing but business above that sort of nonsense trope. Your criticism is no more valid than complaining that Indiana Jones never buys a new hat.

User avatar
SCRawl
Has a bad feeling about this.
Posts: 4148
Joined: 2002-12-24 03:11pm
Location: Burlington, Canada

Re: Jon Favreau to write, exec. produce live-action SW

Post by SCRawl » 2018-10-08 02:00pm

Not to pile on here, but let's examine this a little more closely. Check out his right (our left) thigh armour. Note that it has suffered what looks like a projectile strike against it in the lower left corner. Other than replacing the part, what maintenance is he going to be able to perform on it to bring it back up to specs?

Now look at his left (our right) thigh armour, and notice that it's of a different design. There are really only two main scenarios which could explain this: either they are different by design, or they are different by the necessity of his situation. With most humanoids being (more or less) symmetrical the first scenario seems unlikely, so we are left with necessity, and the most likely reason for this is that he doesn't have two identical parts available. Since they aren't identical, you'd think that one is at least marginally better than the other, so you'd think that he'd prefer having two of the same design; the fact that he doesn't suggests that he doesn't have the means to acquire them, and further that the damaged parts he does have are better than the next best alternative.
73% of all statistics are made up, including this one.

I'm waiting as fast as I can.

User avatar
Elheru Aran
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 12343
Joined: 2004-03-04 01:15am
Location: Georgia

Re: Jon Favreau to write, exec. produce live-action SW

Post by Elheru Aran » 2018-10-08 02:05pm

Asymmetry by design isn't unknown at all, it was actually surprisingly common with IRL armour back in the day. Generally it was either to lend mobility, to protect parts of the body that were further away from the enemy, or for tactical advantage.

That said, there was usually still a stylistic continuation with the rest of the armour if it was purposeful asymmetry, and in a ranged weapon environment any difference in body posture is going to be meaningless-- a blaster shot isn't going to care whether you lead with your right or your left. So I will concur with the notion that this armour is probably built out of scavenged pieces.
It's a strange world. Let's keep it that way.

User avatar
SCRawl
Has a bad feeling about this.
Posts: 4148
Joined: 2002-12-24 03:11pm
Location: Burlington, Canada

Re: Jon Favreau to write, exec. produce live-action SW

Post by SCRawl » 2018-10-08 03:13pm

Elheru Aran wrote:
2018-10-08 02:05pm
Asymmetry by design isn't unknown at all, it was actually surprisingly common with IRL armour back in the day. Generally it was either to lend mobility, to protect parts of the body that were further away from the enemy, or for tactical advantage.
My point wasn't that armour couldn't be asymmetrical -- we know that it can be, and there are historical and modern examples of this happening. I just found it unlikely that this particular leg armour would be asymmetrical on purpose, and I am gratified that you concur.
73% of all statistics are made up, including this one.

I'm waiting as fast as I can.

Post Reply