Why doe? Why JJ Abrams? Could Disney not afford a bigger director? Why not go for a huge fucking name like Spielberg or the next one available? Would they turn down the project? Does Disney not want to make it *that* good, because it would be 2deep for the 6gorillion of plebs? Or what's really the deal?
Should have been Zack Snyder
Cause he's a safe bet when it comes to rebooting franchises. He might not be brilliant but he's about as solid as they get.
Spielberg said he doesn't want to do Star Wars until his last movie cause he wouldn't be able to top it.
Auteurs in general are too problematic to deal with, and would probably be unwilling to deal with studio interference on someone else's franchise.
Affleck was their first choice IIRC
>>63929847
who would /tv/ hate more? JJ or Snyder?
Also look at VIII and IX. Rian Johnson and Colin Treverrow
>>63929961
I can't speak for anyone else but Snyder for me. He just bores me to tears. He somehow managed to make Superman boring to me.
>>63929948
Brad Bird I think, but he was busy on Tomorrowland. Smart fucking choice Bird.
>>63929787
need someone who'll agree to put specific scenes in for the trailer.
Han and Chewie going "I'm home" immediately limits the story to a certain range of options. If Disney wanted that in their trailer then the director would be stuck with finding a way to structure the story around it. They have to be someone who doesn't mind mangling the plot for their ends.
>>63929787
Disney's tried to get bigger directors
But do you also know what bigger directors want? Creative control, Disney's not so eager on that so they resort to puppets like Abrams
>>63930023
Are you me?
>>63929787
He did a good job on star trek.
Speilberg is a hack now like lucas
>>63929787
>Why not go for a huge fucking name like Spielberg
Because they have a brain
>>63929787
>jeans to the premier
Fight the good fight, George.
>>63929787
>Could Disney not afford a bigger director?
Studios don't want "big" directors on their tentpole projects, they want people just proven enough to know that they're competent and in their directorial prime, but not so big as to be bigger than the project.
For their part, the directors you're thinking of as "big" are probably either past their prime or successful enough not to want to take make-work projects for studios and would rather do whatever it is they themselves want. But it's not like Abrams is some kind of unknown, at this point he's easily as proven as Spielberg was by the early '80s.
>>63929787
>Why JJ Abrams?
He literally already directed a successful A New Hope remake once already.
>>63931366
Spielberg was taking actual suggestions from Lucas the entire time and were using Lucas' existing ideas.
He'd do a fine job with these movies if there was little to no Lucas influence.
>>63929787
there fixed.
>tfw Godard will never direct a star wars movie
>>63931753
>But it's not like Abrams is some kind of unknown, at this point he's easily as proven as Spielberg was by the early '80s.
lol, not even a quarter of the way there, if that
>>63932051
Even accepting that RLM logic as true, you really think he'd make a star wars film without including him?
>>63929787
Because he's the perfect studio tool, no creativity or vision.
He's a neutered Lucas and Spielberg.
>>63932503
I'll concede that in reality, he would have most likely allowed Lucas to exercise more influence than JJ did. However, Spielberg could have made a better movie if Lucas was 100% guaranteed to not be around. Assuming he didn't say "fuck it" right off the bat like Indy 4.
>>63931366
Why do people still think this is a bad movie?
>>63932757
Because it was a bad movie
JJ gave them a great deal
