Diego Luna cast as lead role for Rogue One

[DariusAPB 6,925]

and that's another point.

 

GWELDOLINE CHRISTIE AS CAPTAIN PHASMA!

 

Badass lady in semi space marine semi stormtrooper armour.

[Hobojebus 11,341]

Well she had to do something between series of GoT i suppose.

[Chucknuckle 2,811]

What a minute, someone catch me up to speed. Is this another Star Wars movie?

[SpikeSpiegel 2,077]

What a minute, someone catch me up to speed. Is this another Star Wars movie?

Yes, its release is due for December 2016 and is set to take place between Revenge of the Sith and A New Hope.

Edited May 14, 2015 by SpikeSpiegel

[Forgottenlore 9,823]

What a minute, someone catch me up to speed. Is this another Star Wars movie?

Assuming you are being serious

It's the first of the 3 announced stand alone movies that will be released in between eps 7-9 as part of disney's statement that they intend to release a SW movie every year for the foreseeable future.

[Robin Graves 6,050]

Atleast he looks the part, that's a start.

 

Also...

 

Diego Luna: his name even sounds like it could belong to a X-wing pilot.

[SpikeSpiegel 2,077]

Diego Luna: his name even sounds like it could belong to a X-wing pilot.

It really does sound something very Star Wars-y. Like a new Rogue Squadron pilot. But given that its the SW universe they'd probably make him Bothan and have his name ridiculously spelled out like Dyægoh Loonuh in order to mask the real-world likeness of the name.

[Chucknuckle 2,811]

Thanks guys, I had no idea this was a thing. I'm glad it's being set in the 'classic' part of the Star Wars, much like X Wing itself.

Are Disney serious about releasing a new Star Wars movie every year? I don't think that's necessarily a good idea...

[DigitalChicanery 311]

Are Disney serious about releasing a new Star Wars movie every year? I don't think that's necessarily a good idea...

 

Been working fine for Marvel...

[Forgottenlore 9,823]

Thanks guys, I had no idea this was a thing. I'm glad it's being set in the 'classic' part of the Star Wars, much like X Wing itself.Are Disney serious about releasing a new Star Wars movie every year? I don't think that's necessarily a good idea...

Well, the "foreseeable future" in Hollywood is only 6-7 years anyway, so the new trilogy, and 3 stand alone movies in between pretty much covers it. Anything after that will probably depend on the reception that the force awakens gets. But Disney did pay $4,000,000,000 for the property, they are going to want to make that back.

[Chucknuckle 2,811]

Eh, some of the Avengers movies are pretty forgettable. Iron Man 2 and 3 were average, Age of Ultron was pretty good but no where near as good as the first one.

Absence makes the heart grow fonder, less is more, etc.

EDIT: I'd love for all the movies to be great, though!

Edited May 15, 2015 by Chucknuckle

[Forgottenlore 9,823]

Eh, some of the Avengers movies are pretty forgettable. Iron Man 2 and 3 were average, Age of Ultron was pretty good but no where near as good as the first one.

 

Even a moderately forgettable Star Wars movie is still MORE STAR WARS. And significantly better than the prequels (and I actually rather like the prequels).

 

I have thoroughly enjoyed all of the Marvel Cinematic Universe movies, even Iron Man 2 (unquestionably the worst). If Disney can do as well with 11 Star Wars movies in a row I will be over the moon (not a moon) Death Star with happiness.

[Hobojebus 11,341]

Thing is although Disney own marvel their contribution to the movies is only money, with Disney in charge expect them to drive the franchise into the ground just like they did with all those crap sequels to classic films.

I'd like rogue one to be good but I've seen monsters and Godzilla so I have no faith in the director, much like I have no faith in jj.

[Nightshrike 1,810]

You know, Hobo, pessimism shortens lifespans.  

 

[treybert 893]

 

What a minute, someone catch me up to speed. Is this another Star Wars movie?

Assuming you are being serious

It's the first of the 3 announced stand alone movies that will be released in between eps 7-9 as part of disney's statement that they intend to release a SW movie every year for the foreseeable future.

 

 

Also the plot is about stealing the death star plans.... which is exactly what Kyle did in the very first level of Dark Forces.

[Hobojebus 11,341]

You know, Hobo, pessimism shortens lifespans.  

 

Actually no healthy scepticism prevents brain damage that's caused by believing anything your told on faith.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/10914137/What-God-does-to-your-brain.html

[Nightshrike 1,810]

Pessimism does shorten lifespans though, multiple studies have confirmed it.  And anyway, it's not faith to withhold an opinion until more facts are in, it's good science.  Also, in the absence of confirming evidence one way or another, it's probably emotionally healthier to look forward to something than to dread it.

[DariusAPB 6,925]

If it's star wars, and it has no jedi/is focused away from the jedi then it will be good more or less no matter what.

 

 

This is a rule i've used as a steady rule of thumb for the star wars games, and check it out: X-wing, TIE Fighter, Dark Forces, Rogue Squadron, Republic Commando.

 

I think it will be a good rule of thumb for SW full stop. (We'll ignore the made for TV stuff from the early 80s).

[Hobojebus 11,341]

Pessimism does shorten lifespans though, multiple studies have confirmed it.  And anyway, it's not faith to withhold an opinion until more facts are in, it's good science.  Also, in the absence of confirming evidence one way or another, it's probably emotionally healthier to look forward to something than to dread it.

The correct response to any and all things is always scepticism we have a word for taking things at face value without evidence:gullibility.

 

And i'd rather have a shorter lifespan and control of my mind and bowels than live to be 120 and have to wear adult diapers while drooling all over myself.

[Nightshrike 1,810]

 

Pessimism does shorten lifespans though, multiple studies have confirmed it.  And anyway, it's not faith to withhold an opinion until more facts are in, it's good science.  Also, in the absence of confirming evidence one way or another, it's probably emotionally healthier to look forward to something than to dread it.

The correct response to any and all things is always scepticism we have a word for taking things at face value without evidence:gullibility.

 

And i'd rather have a shorter lifespan and control of my mind and bowels than live to be 120 and have to wear adult diapers while drooling all over myself.

 

 

Did you read the article you linked?  It said, in general, religion is associated with positive psychological benefits.  It's only the "born again" movement which produces stress to the brain.  Properly speaking, a pessimistic atheist, according to my research on pessimism, and the article you linked, is likely to die something like 10 years sooner, whereas the religious optimist will live to 120 with a healthy mind and sound body and a community of friends.  And yes, I'm an atheist myself, but the article showed positive benefits to religion, so much so that the atheist author is attempting to mimic religion without the faith to get those benefits for himself.

[Hobojebus 11,341]

You keep calling me a pessimist but you've got zero evidence for that as i've said i'm a sceptic that does not mean i have a negative outlook it means i take nothing at face value.

 

Monsters sucked and godzilla was a large disappointment ergo i view the director poorly, same goes for jar jar i've watched things like fringe, lost and the star trek movies and disliked them, my opinion is informed by prior experience.

 

I spend alot of time trying to make people laugh on these and other forums generally thats not indicative of someone who's miserable, in fact the only real trigger i have is the prequels because it took something i loved as a child and broke it for 10 years i couldn't touch anything star wars related.

 

Your making a baseless assumption without the evidence to support it and as a result are coming up with a false conclusion, as my old IT professor always used to say "garbage in means garbage out".

[YwingAce 2,546]

Whelp this thread has been gunned down.

GG guys.

[Galactic Funk 831]

I just can't comprehend why people are so hell bent on thinking Disney is going to ruin Star Wars. Seriously, if you watched Episode's I-III (and even elements of RotJ for that matter) and you still hung around as a Star Wars fan after what George Lucas did then how can you possibly believe that it is just now going to be "ruined"?

Parts of all those aforementioned films were incredible but every one of them required you to accept some truly abysmal elements. The Phantom Menace gave you a completely unnecessary, obnoxious character that was contrived to bring humor. That alone was a debacle of monumental proportions. That's the worst of many bad decisions in that film.

All three of the prequel films are plagued by bad writing and bad acting from both actors portraying Anakin (seriously, Darth Vader's back story is the focal point of all three films and you screw up that casting?) but the dialogue and forced love story in Attack of the Clones is where it bottoms out.

So people are worried about what JJ Abrams might do wrong? Really?

I'm not saying the Disney led Star Wars franchise is going to be the greatest thing since sliced bread either. Only that it won't get worse. It will be better than the prequels, I am certain.

[YwingAce 2,546]

I just can't comprehend why people are so hell bent on thinking Disney is going to ruin Star Wars. Seriously, if you watched Episode's I-III (and even elements of RotJ for that matter) and you still hung around as a Star Wars fan after what George Lucas did then how can you possibly believe that it is just now going to be "ruined"?

Parts of all those aforementioned films were incredible but every one of them required you to accept some truly abysmal elements. The Phantom Menace gave you a completely unnecessary, obnoxious character that was contrived to bring humor. That alone was a debacle of monumental proportions. That's the worst of many bad decisions in that film.

All three of the prequel films are plagued by bad writing and bad acting from both actors portraying Anakin (seriously, Darth Vader's back story is the focal point of all three films and you screw up that casting?) but the dialogue and forced love story in Attack of the Clones is where it bottoms out.

So people are worried about what JJ Abrams might do wrong? Really?

I'm not saying the Disney led Star Wars franchise is going to be the greatest thing since sliced bread either. Only that it won't get worse. It will be better than the prequels, I am certain.

Because I've seen what JJ's done to other work.

I can honestly say I'm very unimpressed with what we've seen so far.

[Vorpal Sword 14,685]

Thing is although Disney own marvel their contribution to the movies is only money...

I'm not sure how true that is. Disney provides the money, then markets and distributes the movies with no other input? That doesn't sound at all like the Mouse we all know and love.

...with Disney in charge expect them to drive the franchise into the ground just like they did with all those crap sequels to classic films.

Uh, which ones do you have in mind? Do you mean their direct-to-video animation stuff?