The general story, no. Regardless, Abrams, Kennedy and Bob Iger had little use for Lucas' treatments for the sequels and went their own direction after the sale was completed, probably due to the lasting impression from the previous three more than anything. The Force Awakens going to be a massive success as it's going to pass Avatar as the #1 movie in the United States. There was no guarantee that was going to happen. It looks as if Episode VIII is going to be an even better film from the initial buzz rolling out about the script.

Quote from: Endless Flight;870775The general story, no. Regardless, Abrams, Kennedy and Bob Iger had little use for Lucas' treatments for the sequels and went their own direction after the sale was completed, probably due to the lasting impression from the previous three. The Force Awakens going to be a massive success as it's going to pass Avatar as the #1 movie in the United States. There was no guarantee that was going to happen. It looks as if Episode VIII is going to be an even better film from the initial buzz rolling out about the script.

They didn't go their own direction, they did a limp remake of the original. Which only proves my earlier point: Disney had no use for anything original from George Lucas -they just wanted to slap his name brand on their own mediocre fan fiction, and shelled out billions to do so.

Quote from: Elfdart;870778They didn't go their own direction, they did a limp remake of the original. Which only proves my earlier point: Disney had no use for anything original from George Lucas -they just wanted to slap his name brand on their own mediocre fan fiction, and shelled out billions to do so.

Shelling out billions for the Star Wars IP makes business sense. Shelling out a lot of money for a George Lucas script from this century...not so much.

"People on internet forum don't like popular movie.  Details at eleven!"

I ended up seeing it in an old theatre for $5.  It was fine.  Better than the prequels.  Won't see it in theatres again.  Won't buy it later.  Will watch again with friends right before the next movie comes out.

I liked it more than the JJverse star trek stuff.

Quote from: NathanIW;870903I liked it more than the JJverse star trek stuff.

I said the exact same thing to my wife after we saw it.

Disney got a bargain. They will make billions and billions of dollars off of toys, glasses, novels, comics, gift items, and expensive collectibles.

Also, Lucas got a cut of ALL Disney profits as part of the deal, and both parties still made out like bandits.

Quote from: Elfdart;870773My point still stands, even if the math is a little off.

Uh... No.

First, "total budget" is not the same thing as "production budget". You've now admitted that this is true, but for some reason you still want to compare the two directly.

Second, you claim that the "total budget" bump from $200 million to $350 million is primarily due to marketing. This is also not true: It's primarily due to profit-sharing. (After adjusting for inflation, the primary reason Episode VII was more expensive to produce than TPM is because (a) Harrison Ford didn't come cheap and (b) J.J. Abrams, unlike George Lucas, doesn't won the production company.)

Finally, even if we embrace your apples-to-oranges comparisons AND we assume that AOTC and ROTS both featured $0 of publicity, we've already demonstrated that your original claim was, in fact, completely wrong.

Quote from: Elfdart;870778They didn't go their own direction, they did a limp remake of the original. Which only proves my earlier point: Disney had no use for anything original from George Lucas -they just wanted to slap his name brand on their own mediocre fan fiction, and shelled out billions to do so.

And that's still not the way accounting works. Your continued insistence that the only thing Disney is producing with the Star Wars IP is Episode VII is... bizarre.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;870943Uh... No.

First, "total budget" is not the same thing as "production budget". You've now admitted that this is true, but for some reason you still want to compare the two directly.

Second, you claim that the "total budget" bump from $200 million to $350 million is primarily due to marketing. This is also not true: It's primarily due to profit-sharing. (After adjusting for inflation, the primary reason Episode VII was more expensive to produce than TPM is because (a) Harrison Ford didn't come cheap and (b) J.J. Abrams, unlike George Lucas, doesn't won the production company.)

Bullshit. There can't be any profit-sharing when the movie had yet to be released, let alone turn a profit.

QuoteFinally, even if we embrace your apples-to-oranges comparisons AND we assume that AOTC and ROTS both featured $0 of publicity, we've already demonstrated that your original claim was, in fact, completely wrong.

No, it means my estimate for the total cost of the Prequels was off by about $60 million dollars, and your estimate for TFA was off by $150 million.

QuoteAnd that's still not the way accounting works. Your continued insistence that the only thing Disney is producing with the Star Wars IP is Episode VII is... bizarre.

Since I never even implied such a thing, let alone insisted on it, you may now take your little strawman, soak him in kerosene, set him alight and stick him way up your ass.

You really need to stop lying.

I will say this much: if it involved starfighters shooting at moving targets, it was good stuff, and Poe Dameron was the sort of character I demand out of a Star Wars film (and wish he got more time).

This was one of the best filmed dogfight sequences in the franchise's history, and while it repeated some beats from A New Hope, actually seeing an ace pilot in an ace custom show us why he's that good (and thus earned that custom fighter) is a welcome change.

Now, more of that please: less informed ability, and more demonstrated ability.

(Also, a Finn/Poe buddy flick.)

Quote from: Elfdart;870948Bullshit. There can't be any profit-sharing when the movie had yet to be released, let alone turn a profit.

The $350 million number is an estimated total including both future advertising and profit-sharing based on estimated box office revenue. That's how these numbers work.

QuoteNo, it means my estimate for the total cost of the Prequels was off by about $60 million dollars, and your estimate for TFA was off by $150 million.

Since I also estimated the total cost of TFA as $350 million, you're either claiming that the total budget of TFA is actually $500 or you're further demonstrating your complete ignorance of what the term "production budget" means.

I'm guessing it's the latter. Which is rather pathetic since the distinction between "total cost" and "production budget" has (a) been repeatedly explained to you in this thread and (b) is also explicitly called out in the NYT and Forbes articles you keep alluding to.

Quote from: Elfdart;870948

QuoteAnd that's still not the way accounting works. Your continued insistence that the only thing Disney is producing with the Star Wars IP is Episode VII is... bizarre.

Since I never even implied such a thing, let alone insisted on it, you may now take your little strawman, soak him in kerosene, set him alight and stick him way up your ass.

Huh. Well, apparently someone hacked your account and posted this:

Quote from: Elfdart;870661That's right, Disney spent over $350 million on this monument to mediocrity: more than all three Prequels combined*. Add in the costs of buying out George Lucas, and Disney has paid close to $5 billion just to slap Lucas' name, brand and IP on their own hackneyed, middling science fiction. It's basically John Carter, only with the Lucas paint job and hood ornament.

It obviously couldn't have been you posting that, of course, since you've just denied ever doing such a thing. You should probably change your password or something.

QuoteYou really need to stop lying.

... says the guy who honestly thought he could get people to believe a lie that could be trivially disproved by hitting the "previous page" button.

The combination of your ignorance, stupidity, and mendacity is truly legendary to behold here.

Here's a challenge for you: Demonstrate even the most basic understanding of film budgets with your next post.

Quote from: danbuter;870939Disney got a bargain. They will make billions and billions of dollars off of toys, glasses, novels, comics, gift items, and expensive collectibles.

Also, Lucas got a cut of ALL Disney profits as part of the deal, and both parties still made out like bandits.

Yep, he got $2.2B in cash and $2B in Disney stock.

He's not hurting for money.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;871013The $350 million number is an estimated total including both future advertising and profit-sharing based on estimated box office revenue. That's how these numbers work.

You will provide evidence for this claim, right?

Future advertising would be negligible, since the figure came out about a week or so before the movie itself did. As a world-wide release, it's unlikely Disney would be spending much after the film hit theaters, since they have been advertising everywhere except a few countries slated for later release. What's more, advertising in China, India, Greece and the few countries where the movie hasn't opened yet is much cheaper than in the US, Europe or Japan.

As for Harrison Ford's back-end deal, it accounts for at most a small percentage of that $150 million (assuming that your claim isn't total horseshit like everything else you've written on the subject):

QuoteContrasting this to the old guard is interesting: They're being paid paid very, very handsomely, led by Harrison Ford likely making up to $34 million for The Force Awakens if (read: when) it makes $1 billion, according to the Independent.

Now, given that Variety puts Ford's base salary $10-20 million, that means Ford's profit-sharing would range from $14-24 million. Let's take the higher figure, on the assumption that TFA is going to breeze past $2 billion. Let's also assume Mark Hamill and Carrie Fisher also get something on the back end for an even $50 million of profit participation. So where did the other $100 million go?

QuoteSince I also estimated the total cost of TFA as $350 million, you're either claiming that the total budget of TFA is actually $500 or you're further demonstrating your complete ignorance of what the term "production budget" means.

No, you dishonest fucktard. I included marketing costs for TFA because movies don't advertise themselves and airlines and hotels don't transport/accommodate actors and directors all over the world for free. Those are huge costs on most movies -especially Disney science fiction movies. Yet you want to pretend the Mouse isn't really paying for any of that, or that for some arbitrary reason, marketing doesn't count. Worse still, you're implying it doesn't exist.

QuoteI'm guessing it's the latter. Which is rather pathetic since the distinction between "total cost" and "production budget" has (a) been repeatedly explained to you in this thread and (b) is also explicitly called out in the NYT and Forbes articles you keep alluding to.

What a lying little shitstain you are. I'm not the one drawing a distinction. You're trying to confuse the issue by pretending that just because some of the money Disney spent on TFA wasn't spent on actually making the movie, the that means Disney didn't really spend it.

QuoteHuh. Well, apparently someone hacked your account and posted this:

Quote from: Lying FucktardAnd that's still not the way accounting works. Your continued insistence that the only thing Disney is producing with the Star Wars IP is Episode VII is... bizarre.

Quote from: ElfdartSince I never even implied such a thing, let alone insisted on it, you may now take your little strawman, soak him in kerosene, set him alight and stick him way up your ass

.

Feel free to quote where I claimed Disney was only making Episode 7, you lying twat.

Until you can do so, you can fuck right off.

Quote from: Elfdart;871115Feel free to quote where I claimed Disney was only making Episode 7, you lying twat.

You do realize that cutting the bit where I quoted you saying exactly that doesn't actually make it disappear from the post three inches above yours, right?

Quote

Quote... you're further demonstrating your complete ignorance of what the term "production budget" means. Which is rather pathetic since the distinction between "total cost" and "production budget" has (a) been repeatedly explained to you in this thread and (b) is also explicitly called out in the NYT and Forbes articles you keep alluding to.

I'm not the one drawing a distinction.

Yes. That's right. Your failure to distinguish between "production budget" and "total cost" is, in fact, one of the major reasons everything you've said here has been unmitigated bullshit.

Remember the bit where I challenged you to demonstrate even the most basic understanding of how film budgets work? You have failed the challenge.

Quote from: Bradford C. Walker;870950I will say this much: if it involved starfighters shooting at moving targets, it was good stuff, and Poe Dameron was the sort of character I demand out of a Star Wars film (and wish he got more time).

This was one of the best filmed dogfight sequences in the franchise's history, and while it repeated some beats from A New Hope, actually seeing an ace pilot in an ace custom show us why he's that good (and thus earned that custom fighter) is a welcome change.

Now, more of that please: less informed ability, and more demonstrated ability.

(Also, a Finn/Poe buddy flick.)

I liked it. The Death Star Planet Ripoff was a bit over the top but at least they had the actual movie characters going, "not ANOTHER superweapon!" for it.

I plan to see it again, in theaters.

Quote from: Jame Rowe;871164I liked it. The Death Star Planet Ripoff was a bit over the top but at least they had the actual movie characters going, "not ANOTHER superweapon!" for it.

Also the minor character talking about how those kinds of superweapons always have some vulnerable weak point that can be attacked was cute. Classic lampshading.