Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Re: "Star Wars" live-action show producer gives status update

2 views
Skip to first unread message

Duggy

unread,
Jan 10, 2012, 12:15:45 AM1/10/12
to
On Jan 10, 12:06 pm, David <dimla...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/01/09/star-wars-live-action-show-get...

- 50 scripts have been completed

Lucas has been saying that a lot of scripts are to be produced in
advance. There are problems with that.

If characters, set-ups, situations don't work there's a lot less room
to change them. There's little room to play up the things that do
work.

- The episodes are an hour long

Is this a surprise.

- Each is “bigger” than “any of the prequels were”

That doesn't seem possible for TV.

- They take place between episode 3 and episode 4

Well, duh.

- The working title is Star Wars: Underworld and the show is about
the “underneath of what is going on”, “the criminals, the gangs that
are running like, you know Wall Street, basically running the United
States”

Sounds like an interesting series of Star Wars EU novels.

- McCallum describes the show as “complex”, “dark” and “adult”

If only the prequels could have been described that way.

- The budget could be as much as $5 million per episode

Ouch.

- But the show just can’t be made for that at the moment

Ouch.

- The budget is high because there are lots of digitally animated
characters

Include less digitally animated characters.

===
= DUG.
===

Duggy

unread,
Jan 11, 2012, 4:52:49 AM1/11/12
to
On Jan 11, 7:29 pm, AC <x...@xxx.xxx> wrote:
> David wrote:
> >http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/01/09/star-wars-live-action-show-get...
>
> I note the word "adult".
>
> Saw that before. Caprica claimed to be "adult". That meant little more
> than tits.

Yay for tits!

Yeah... as I noted when Torchwood started and some said it was "Doctor
Who for adults", I noted it was "Doctor Who not for kids"... the plots
stayed at the same level but a bit more sex and violence was added.

Then again, the claim came after "complex plots" so who knows.

===
= DUG.
===

AC

unread,
Jan 11, 2012, 7:20:03 AM1/11/12
to
Oh, Im all for tits. Butt and minge too. But I don't want it stuck in
the middle of my "serious" scifi. There is a time and place for smut.
Although Im not opposed to the odd eye pleasing character, with the
weekly hope of a bit of camel toe. (Too much?)

Ok, if there is a proper relevance to the characters or plot, then OK,
but with Caprica , and as you say, Torchwood, is was largely irrelevant.
Although, with TW there was some character development driven by the
"adult" stuff. So, IMHO, it sort of got there, ish.

"Complex plots" I like. That's what I call adult, or "grown up".
Although I suspect that nowadays the young 'uns will understand these
complex plots better than I would!!!! Ho hum......

Does all make me wonder what words like "adult" and "grown up" mean in
practice. One one level, added sex and violence could simply be what it
actually is. Or simply showing it rather than implying it. Add a bit of
fruity language too, I suppose.


--
AC

Duggy

unread,
Jan 11, 2012, 7:52:20 AM1/11/12
to
I was once in a "Adult Store" with an lesbian and her sister when
someone used the term "Sex Shop".

At which point we were told "It's an Adult Store, not a Sex Shop. We
don't sell Sex."

I got a dirty look when I asked "Do you sell Adults?"

===
= DUG.
===

AC

unread,
Jan 11, 2012, 9:18:55 PM1/11/12
to
Nice :)

Stupid distinction though. I assume every product in the show was sexual
in some way, right? But there was nothing else deemed "adult", like
booze, knives, or guns, for example? So, its not an "adult" shop either.

--
AC

Duggy

unread,
Jan 12, 2012, 2:48:54 AM1/12/12
to
> Nice :)
>
> Stupid distinction though. I assume every product in the show was sexual
> in some way, right? But there was nothing else deemed "adult", like
> booze, knives, or guns, for example? So, its not an "adult" shop either.

You are correct. It was a "sex-related products" shop.

===
= DUG.
===

AC

unread,
Jan 12, 2012, 6:46:45 AM1/12/12
to
Er, was going to tag on "... for adults". But that implies a
"sex-related products for kids" shop. Eeeeeek.

--
AC

Duggy

unread,
Jan 12, 2012, 7:39:27 AM1/12/12
to
> Er, was going to tag on "... for adults". But that implies a
> "sex-related products for kids" shop. Eeeeeek.

Yeah, the sex-related products for kids shop is in a completely
different part of town.

===
= DUG.
===
0 new messages