It was only a matter of time, but Jonathan Rhys Meyers is the winner of the “Who Will Be The First Rumored New Star Wars Trilogy Cast Member” sweepstakes. The lucky young actor is Jonathan Rhys Meyers, who is reportedly in talks withe Lucasfilm/Disney for a major, though unspecified, role in the new trilogy of films announced last film.

The rumor comes from Latino Review, so that automatically raises a red flag. However, Bleeding Cool is reporting from their own sources that “the actor’s agency has been approached about the role, but it doesn’t sound to us as though actual contract negotiations have started. We may not be privy to the latest, though, I have to admit.” So there may be a ring of truth to the story, just inflated by Latino Review’s hype machine.

Rhys Meyers doesn’t strike me as a bad choice, though I’ve not seen much of the limited work he has already done. He had a supporting role in Mission: Impossible III, directed by Episode VII helmer J. J. Abrams, before going on to headline Showtime’s The Tudors series. He is set to star in NBC’s Dracula this fall, though since that is set to be a 13-episode series, it shouldn’t prove much of an impediment to his potential Star Wars filming schedule.

If true, expect an official announcement when his deal is closer to being finalized.

OK, there is really no way to fully discuss J. J. Abrams’ Star Trek Into Darkness without getting into spoilers, big spoilers, specifically in relation to one character and a plot point that sets off the film’s final third. Granted some of these spoilers are out there, but some are not. My one sentence, non-spoiler review would be that the film is entertaining enough if viewed in a bubble, but in context with the entirety of the Star Trek franchise it is a disappointment.

For a fuller critique read on, but be warned that there are spoilers from here on out.

When Abrams successfully rebooted the Star Trek franchise in 2009, he managed to do what was thought to be a near-impossible task – he not only refreshed the stale theatrical arm of the long-running science-fiction franchise but he did it in a way that allowed him to bring in a new cast to play beloved characters and in a way that not only didn’t invalidate what had come before but also freed him off the past’s shackles. And at the end of the film, Abrams and audiences were left with a new Star Trek universe into which the crew of the Enterprise could boldly go to seek out strange new worlds, etcetera, etcetera.

So when news reports about the sequel began to circulate stating the film’s villain would be Khan Noonian Singh, memorably played by Ricardo Montalban in the original Star Trek TV series episode “Space Seed” and then again in Star Trek: The Wrath Of Khan, I thought that was a bad idea. With a whole new galaxy to explore, why try to go and revive one of the series’ best loved villains? It seemed like a fool’s errand. The dynamic interplay between William Shatner’s Captain Kirk and Montalban’s Khan was in no need of updating, so why try? It was a story told well the first time, so why not take advantage of the blank canvas you have and do something new?

And so when Benedict Cumberbatch’s terrorist bombing character reveals to Kirk (Chris Pine) after leading the starship captain on a chase deep into enemy Klingon space that his name is Khan, I let out an audible groan. But then something happened. Abrams and screenwriters Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman and Damon Lindelof zigged where you would have expected them to zag and set up a situation where Kirk and Khan had to form an uneasy alliance in order for both of them to survive. And it worked. I found myself actively warming to the idea.

However, just as the film manages to do what I thought was impossible in establishing its own unique working dynamic for the Khan character it had to go and recreate one of the entire Star Trek franchise’s most iconic moments – the death of Spock in the Star Trek II: The Wrath Of Khan. Now I am sure that Abrams and screenwriters Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman and Damon Lindelof all congratulated themselves on being so clever as to reverse Kirk and Spock in this situation, placing Kirk in the deadly radiation-filled chamber and Spock on the outside unable to reach his friend. But this isn’t clever, it’s a terrible cheat. Abrams and company aren’t just taking elements of what has gone before and reworking them, they are relying on a specific moment from a previous film to evoke an emotional reaction from the audience rather than doing the heavy-lifting themselves and trying to create their own scene to do get that reaction. However, it falls short of achieving what they seemed to hope for and felt rather forced in the film. It not only pulled me out of the movie but made me lose any good will I had built up from their previous handling of Khan. It is just lazy and cynical screenwriting and the film’s third act suffers greatly for it.

(I should note screenwriter Akiva Goldsman (Lost In Space, I, Robot, I Am Legend) has a cameo as a Starfleet admiral in one scene. Since I have found a number of his films also suffer from third act difficulties, I half want to believe that it is his own bad mojo responsible for the problems here.)

The rest of the film is fairly top notch. The relationship we glimpsed in the 2009 Star Trek between Spock (Zachery Quinto) and Uhura (Zoe Saldana) gets explored a bit more prominently this time, allowing for a comedic moment between the two with Kirk stuck in the middle and lets Saldana have more screen time and things to do than Nichelle Nichols got to do in any of the original cast films. Although not specifically stated in the film, there are a few moments for Spock’s character where we see how the destruction of his homeworld in the last film has colored his actions. The rest of the main cast all acquit themselves nicely with what they are given, though John Cho’s Sulu seems to get the short stick again.

As I stated before, Star Trek Into Darkness is an entertaining enough film if you experience it in a vacuum, without the baggage that fans of the series will undoubtedly bring with them to the theater. However, the filmmakers seem to be distinctly counting on that baggage to sell a major moment in the film’s finale but instead they only manage to remind us how much better the original was.

This almost seems like a no-brainer. But director J. J. Abrams has stated that he plans on bringing back Star Wars composer John Williams to supply music for his upcoming Episode VII.

Ironically, it was the folks over at Trek Movie who got the story, in their post reporting on a German press conference Abrams held with the cast of his upcoming Star Trek Into Darkness, opening in a few weeks. Abrams confirms his intentions to go with Williams around the seven minute mark, stating “apparently he was there long before I was.”

Admittedly, this is a bit of a switch for Abrams, who has usually worked with Michael Giacchino for the music on his films. And given the way Giacchino brilliantly captured the tenor of 60s spy movies scores for the animated The Incredibles, I have to admit that I was looking forward to seeing how he would interpret Williams’ work for the new trilogy. Then again, if you’re looking for any kind of continuity between what has come before and the upcoming films, Williams is your man to do it.

And while we wait for the 2015 unveiling of Episode VII, here is John Williams conducting the Boston Pops in a performance of the music that one him one of his five Academy Awards.

When the first teaser for The Man of Steel trailer hit, it caused many a fan to squeal in delight, and almost as many, if not more, to sneer in disgust over what the film appears to have gotten wrong. Are the squealers cheering before they have a right too? Are the sneerers jumping the gun with their negativity before getting a full picture? The answer to both is yes.

But now we have the first full trailer for the film to give fans more to squeal and sneer about. We have a clearer picture of what the movie entails. Which side do we fall into? Let’s dissect the trailer and find out.

It appears that if Krypton is to be destroyed, it won’t be due to its core exploding, but rather through a global conflict on an epic scale. Of course, due to the sheer amount of Kryptonians that we know are going to be in the film,  I get the feeling that Krypton does not get destroyed.

This hearkens back to a controversial J.J. Abrams script that was making the rounds before Superman Returns where Kal-El was sent to Earth by Jor-El to keep him safe from Kryptonian warlords so he could come back to save Krypton( brought to mind by the “our hopes and dreams travel with you ” line from the trailer). Not only did Superman have to face off against a number of Kryptonian enemies, even Lex Luthor was revealed to be a Kryptonian.

Now, having a living, breathing Krypton does have some advantages. It gives Supes a load of villains just as powerful as he is to go up against. But it also strips away the “Last Son of Krypton” part of the character’s mythos. And since there appears to be a lot of the mythos stripped away, you wonder at what point this will stop being a Superman film and become just a generic superhero story.

Not saying this is true, just speculation on this part of the trailer. But having the studio hand down the maxim to use the elements of a script from the guy who successfully rebooted the Star Trek franchise and was tapped to reboot the Star Wars franchise is all too plausible.

I call this screen cap, “what hath Avatar wrought.”

So this is how the exile from Krypton will be portrayed in this version. I hope there is a reason other than “it looks cool” why baby Kal-El had to be levitated into the rocket ship. Because if it isn’t, then it might come down to a matter of style over substance in the filmmaking. And that seldom ever results in a good movie.

The “He’ll be an outcast. They’ll kill him. /No he’ll be a god to them” reminds me of the John Byrne reboot of the origin in the comics. Byrne’s Krypton was a highly advanced, yet cold and sterile world. When the comic book Lara is showed a representation of Earth (in the form of a shirtless farmhand toiling in the soil) she is repulsed. Jor-El comforts her by saying Kal-El will be strong enough to rule them. Not a word for word copy, but close enough for my first sqee moment of the trailer.

We’ve seen these images before. But the two scenes now are used to establish what will be Superman’s internal conflict. Will he try to hide what he is to pass off as normal, or will he live up to his potential to save people?

Another big part of the Superman mythos is the reveal of his true origins to him by his adoptive parents, the Kents. This is how it is portrayed in this film.

And for as wrong as Jonathan Kent suggesting that Clark let the bus full of school kids die was in the teaser, this scene here is a 180 in the opposite direction. “Can I go back to pretending to be your son?/ You are my son.” Absolutely perfect. Great delivery by Costner too. I can’t begin to tell you how much I love this scene.

Superman in what appears to be the Fortress of Solitude. Glad to see that the voice over shows that the Kents will still play a positive role in turning Clark into the man he is.

And here is our first introduction to Lois Lane, who appears to be following a trail of super deeds done by Clark. It’s an interesting take on the Lois and Clark/Superman dynamic, but raises two red flags with me. One, is the urban legend of an indestructible strongman the story a major metropolitan newspaper like the Daily Planet should be pursuing? Isn’t that more the milieu of the National Enquirer and the Weekly World News? And two, if this film is supposed to be open to the idea that other super humans exist, would this be a news story at all? “Oh, there’s a guy in Alaska who saved some fishermen from a fire with out getting burned? Well, there’s a guy in California who has a ring that allows him to make green race cars with his mind. Big deal.”

I don’t know what context this scene is in, but I think it could quite possibly be the most inventive use of Superman’s powers on screen to date.

The Christ metaphor from the Donner films is still in effect, I see. The narration in scene the above screen caps are taken is almost word for word from the original films.

And we have some action. I’ve seen online where some people think this is a version of DC Comics’ Starro. I say no for a variety of reasons, most notably, it would take a lot of screen time to introduce the character into the narrative in a way that matches up with the tone of the film. Probably just a producer who has a Octopus fixation to match Jon Peters spider fixation.

More action!

Another clue that Krypton hasn’t been destroyed, Zod and a battalion of Kryptonians arrive in a big honkin’ spaceship. First order of business: threaten Jonathan Kent (Which also leads us to believe that they were tracking Kal-El/Clark’s ship to where it landed on Earth).

The Kryptonian invasion does explain why Superman is at odds with the military.

Gee, Zod certainly likes to threaten Superman’s father figures, doesn’t he (assuming he is speaking to Jor-El in the screencap above)? And Michael Shannon does like to chew scenery, doesn’t he?

Another of Superman’s powers on display?

Are these meteors hitting the Earth, or Kryptonians engaging in an orgy of destruction?

Also note the LexCorp building in the background. It seems, like in The Amazing Spider-Man, the hero’s main nemesis will make his presence felt only through corporate signage.

Again, I have to say that I am impressed by the way the Kryptonian power set is portrayed in the film. As above, where a missile hits a Kryptonian soldier and he barely flinches. And also…

…Superman’s super-speed! It is only a brief snippet, but it one of Supes’ powers that hasn’t really been portrayed well on screen.

I might have said this on the site before, but Superman willingly handing himself over to the military is great characterization. It establishes that while Superman could establish his will over the human race, but chooses not to. Love it.

Well, that certainly looks ominous.

Some Kryptonian armor.

This scene is both good and bad to me. I love “It stands for hope.” But the “How about Super— SQWARK!/Excuse me” just comes off as a clumsy attempt at humor. I’m glad to see that the film will not be as relentlessly bleak as its color palette makes it out to be, but still…

The trailer does end on a high note, however. Punch, fly after the punchee, and punch them again? That’s just cool. Again, the way they portray Superman’s powers in the trailer give me hope that at least part of the film will rock.

It stands for hope. Which is what the trailer stands for too. It’s stands for the hope that things Nolan, Snyder and company got right make up for what appears to obvious missteps that appear in the movie.

I am not sure who is more excited about the prospect of J. J. Abrams directing the upcoming Star Wars: Episode VII – fans of the ionic film franchise or Abrams himself.

At least that’s the feeling I have after reading some comments from the director in the latest issue of Britain’s Empire magazine. Abrams is currently starting to do the press for his upcoming Star Trek Into Darkness due out this summer, and it is a sure bet that journalists will be peppering him with questions about what he will be doing over the next few years in a galaxy far, far away. But it turns out that Abrams himself isn’t quite sure yet and admitted as much when Empire asked him about how he is approaching the project.

I don’t know because we’re just getting started. So it’s a great question that I hope I’ll have a good answer to when I know what the answer is. There are infinitely more questions than answers right now, but to me, they’re not that dissimilar. Though I came at these both from very different places, where they both meet is a place of ‘Ooh, that’s really exciting.’ And even though I was never a Star Trek fan, I felt like there was a version of it that would make me excited, that I would think ‘that’s cool, that feels right, I actually would want to see that.

How we were going to get there, what the choices were going to be, who was going to be in it – all of those things I knew would have to be figured out, but it was all based on a foundation of this indescribable, guttural passion for something that could be. It’s a similar feeling that I have with Star Wars. I feel like I can identify a hunger for what I would want to see again and that is an incredibly exciting place to begin a project. The movies, the worlds could not be more different but that feeling that there’s something amazing here is the thing that they share.

Abrams also addressed how he came to change his mind about taking on Episode VII after first publicly stating that he didn’t want to take on the film.

My knee-jerk reaction was that I’m in the middle of working on the Star Trek movie and I can’t even consider it. But then time went by and I got further along working on the movie and getting to a place where I had done most of the heavy lifting. So when I met with Kathy Kennedy we just started discussing it and I was able to actually engage in the conversation. I went down to tell Katie, my wife and I said ‘I had just a very interesting conversation with Kathy.’ That was the beginning.

I will say that Steven [Spielberg] was very encouraging of Star Wars. It’s funny because I talked to him about it and it turned out he knew all about what was going on.

Currently, Star Wars: Episode VII has been targeted for a 2015 release, though in the past Abrams has expressed some concern about meeting that deadline.

A couple of geek friendly franchises – James Bond and Doctor Who – have recently turned 50 years old to much fanfare. The next series to reach that milestone will be Star Trek in 2016. Presumably Paramount is already looking at big plans to celebrate the science-fiction series reaching the half-century mark and a third installment in their big screen reboot of the original classic television series may be one of the things under consideration.

Trek film producer Bryan Burk hinted as much in a conversation with Digital Spy -

Digital Spy: Given that the Gene Roddenberry series debuted in 1966 and we’ve just had a huge Bond 50-year anniversary celebration – has Paramount been talking to you about making a 2016 release date for the next Star Trek film?

Bryan Burk: We’re definitely talking about the next one, but we haven’t talked about a release date. We don’t want to wait four years, the same amount of time between the last one and this one, but it’s going to be a big year to celebrate, hopefully.

Now understandably there are a few things which will affect plans to have the film into theaters in 2016. First and formost will be the search for a director. Given that franchise reboot helmer J J Abrams is off to work similar magic on Disney’s Star Wars: Episode VII, I severly doubt that he would be able to split his time between Star Wars and working on the development of a third Star Trek film. And that’s giving him the benefit of the doubt that Episode VII would even hit its announced release year of 2015, which Abrams was not sure about.

If Paramount is serious about getting Star Trek 3 into theaters in 2016, they will have to find themselves a new director. Will Abrams have a say in that search? Time will tell, though if he retains a producer’s credit on Trek 3, like he did with the Mission: Impossible franchise after Brad Bird slipped into the director’s chair after Abrams, than I wouldn’t be surprised if we see someone like Bird or Cloverfield‘s Matt Reeves step up to the job.

El Mayimbe is like an bad girlfriend. She treats you wrong again and again, yet you feel compelled to believe her over and over again because what she tells you is so sweet.

The often wrong Latino Review reporter is back again, this time with big scoop from the DC Comics film franchise. Scoop so big that El Mayimbe broke out the video camera, found a location somewhat near DC’s Manhattan headquarters, and filmed another video blog about it (Which you can see embedded below).

For those of you who do not have the time nor inclination to watch a video right now, let me give you the Reader’s Digest version of what El Mayimbe said  He states that since Warner Brothers is so impressed with his Batman trilogy and the advance buzz from The Man of Steel, the studio has tapped Christopher Nolan to be the Joss Whedon/J.J. Abrams-esque creative overlord for all of Warner’s DC properties. El Mayimbe also says that Zack Snyder will be joining Nolan’s team as least as a producer, quite possibly as the director of Justice League film. And, personally, what I consider the biggest scoop of all, Christian Bale will be returning as Batman for wherever the DC heroes go in the future.

Here is the video. I do recommend that you find time to watch it, as El Mayimbe comes off as the high school jock trying to convince the class nerd that the head cheerleader has a crush on the geek. He used a similar hard sell while giving us the “Planet Hulk”scoop. We’ve seen how that worked out.

Now is the point in the post, as I always do with scoop from this source, where I say that El Mayimbe does not have all that good a run in spreading accurate rumors. He was wrong when he said that Black Panther was going to be coming from Marvel in 2014, he was wrong when he said Jason Momoa was a lock for Drax in Guardians of the Galaxy, and he was wrong when he said Marvel’s Phase III would be based on Planet Hulk and World War Hulk.

He lists all the DC rumors he got right in the post presenting the video blog. However, it is only fair to note that the freshest of those rumors is Three years old. He can only get an incomplete on his most recent DC related rumors–that Darkseid would be the villain, that the story would be taken from Justice League of America  #183-185, and that there would only be five main characters in the film–because that version of the script was apparently scrapped and will never come to pass.

El Mayimbe’s rumors get so much play because they are the perfect mix of wish fulfillment and plausibility. Having Nolan head up Warners’ superhero output makes sense. Having Christian Bale come back would be a film fan’s dream come true. But if Nolan was being tapped for this, wouldn’t we have heard it way before now? Wouldn’t it be in Warners’ best interest to have it become official as quickly as possible to cut into the Abrams news? Would they really let the negotiations lag enough so El Mayimbe could catch wind of it?

I don’t know. It is a developing situation, and we’ll see if El Mayimbe finally got one right soon enough.

When J J Abrams was announced as the director of Star Wars: Episode VII late last week, the question that seemed to be on everyone’s lips was, “Wow, how did Disney manage to pull Abrams away from the Star Trek franchise over at Paramount?”

The answer comes down to the determination of the woman who George Lucas left in charge of his film empire Lucasfilm prior to his selling it to House of Mouse last fall – longtime producer Kathleen Kennedy.

The Hollywood Reporter has just published an in-depth profile of Kennedy, during which she addresses the process in which she changed Abrams’ mind about jumping ship from one iconic franchise to another after he had initially declined. First she dangled the fact that Oscar-winning screenwriter Michael Arndt was working on the project and that The Empire Strikes Back and Raiders Of The Lost Ark scripter Lawrence Kasdan was consulting on the project. That produced the desired result – ”

Kennedy, Abrams and the writers met secretly for about three hours Dec. 19, and “J.J. was just on the ceiling when I walked out the door,” she recalls. But still, she says, Abrams had “very genuine concerns” about his obligations elsewhere and the impact on his wife and three kids, given the likelihood that the film would not be shot in Los Angeles. And then there was the unique nature of the franchise. “If there was any pause on J.J.’s part, it was the same pause everybody has — including myself — stepping into this,” she says. “Which is, it’s daunting.”

So daunting, the Kennedy indicates that she would be willing to sacrifice Disney’s announced release window of 2015 in order to make sure that everything is done right, not done by a certain deadline.

She is less clear that the first film in the new trilogy will be ready by 2015. “Our goal is to move as quickly as we can, and we’ll see what happens,” says Kennedy. “The timetable we care about is getting the story.”

One thing that the story, in fact none of the stories about Abrams’ hiring that I’ve seen, fails to do is elaborate more on Abrams contract, specifically, is he contracted for just the first film or will he be directing or otherwise involved in some capacity with the following two films? I’m sure we’ll find out at some point.

With Friday’s announcement that J J Abrams has been signed to direct the first installment of Disney’s new Star Wars trilogy, we all just assumed that the film was finally on track for its already announced 2015 release. However, that might not necessarily be the case.

Buried deep in the Hollywood Reporter‘s story on Disney’s announcement of Abrams’ hiring is the following -

Episode VII is set for release in 2015, but sources say Abrams has not committed to that release date, meaning the date could be changed if the development process requires it.

While I am sure that Disney would love to have the film in theaters when they originally announced it would be, I am sure that they know that Abrams does things in his own good, sweet time. Remember that his 2009 Star Trek was delayed from the summer to December in order to finish it to his specifications. That film’s follow up has taken almost four years to get to theaters.

If Episode VII does get pushed back out of 2015, it might not be the worse thing to happen. That summer already has both The Avengers 2 and Justice League penciled in. Avengers 2 should be depositing a ton of money in Disney’s bank account. With Episode VII in 2016, Disney has the potential to have the top grossing film of the year two years in a row. I imagine that it would look nice on the spreadsheets to have that kind of box office two years in a row.

“I’ve left pretty explicit instructions for there not to be any more features. There will definitely be no Episodes VII–IX. That’s because there isn’t any story. I mean, I never thought of anything. And now there have been novels about the events after Episode VI, which isn’t at all what I would have done with it. The Star Wars story is really the tragedy of Darth Vader. That is the story. Once Vader dies, he doesn’t come back to life, the Emperor doesn’t get cloned and Luke doesn’t get married…” – George Lucas, Total Film, May 2008.

As anyone who has tracked his statements about his plans for the Star Wars franchise knows, George Lucas liked to change his mind about the stories he wanted to tell in his blockbuster universe. But with the sale of the franchise and Lucasfilm to Disney and the all-but-confirmed appointment of J. J. Abrams as the director for at least the first installment of the new upcoming trilogy has us turning our minds as to our hopes for and what we would like to see in the new films.

RESPECT THE EXPANDED UNIVERSE: For decades, George Lucas and Lucasfilm told Star Wars fans that there would be no on screen continuation of Luke, Han and Leia’s stories. However, all was not lost because their universe lived on in hundreds of novels, comic book, video and role-playing games, cartoons and toys, most of which was in the official Star Wars canon (meaning Lucasfilm told fans that these auxiliary forms of Star Wars entertainment officially continued the story of the films).

Now, it would be impossible to fit in the multiple decades worth of expanded universe text into a two or three hour movie. But you have to honor it in the new films. Fans spent millions of dollars on this ephemera over the years on the promise that it was an official part of the Star Wars universe. To ignore it would be a slap in the face to every Star Wars fan who religiously bought the books and comics. What I’m essentially saying is, you don’t have to write Mara Jade into the new films, but don’t write anything that takes her out of the universe either. Don’t contradict the expanded universe, and you should be fine. – William Gatevackes

HAVE A STRONG FEMALE LEAD: Remember how badass Princess Leia was in the original Star Wars trilogy, making fun of Darth Vader and Grand Moff Tarkin to their faces, taking charge of her own rescue, leading the charge to save Han in Cloud City, strangling Jabba the Hutt? Now compare that to how docile Amidala seemed in the prequel trilogy. Sure she ran around during some of the action sequences, but she never seemed as independent, smart, resourceful or just flat out as inspiring a character for girls as her offspring Leia was. (And by the way, since Anakin and she were forbidden from being a couple, how did she explain away her pregnancy to everyone around her?) Hopefully with this new trilogy we will see the return of a strong female lead character, up front with the boys. Fortunately, given the news that when Matthew Vaughn was in talks with Disney to direct he pitched the idea of Chloe Moretz as a possible lead in the films, it appears as if there is a strong possibility of this happening. – Rich Drees

BRING BACK MARK HAMILL, HARRISON FORD AND CARRIE FISHER, LEAVE DARTH VADER AND BOBA FETT TO REST IN PEACE: Ever since they announced that there would be new films following after Return of the Jedi, rumors have abounded about which cast members and characters from the original trilogy would be returning for a return appearance.Would Luke, Leia and Han return?

I certainly hope so. Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher and Harrison Ford are all in relatively good health. Ignore Harrison’s pleas to be killed off and explore how these character’s changed over the years. Let’s see how Luke matured into a Jedi Master. How has Han and Leia’s relationship fared over the years? Keeping these characters in, even as just supporting characters, will allow the film to have a great deal of emotional resonance with the fans.

But do you know who I don’t want to see come back? Darth Vader and Boba Fett. Vader has had six movies to tell his story, and his story was completed at the end of Jedi. Darth Maul in the prequel trilogy showed us that you can create an interesting villain. So, create one and leave Vader to his death.

Speaking as a Star Wars fan, the popularity of Boba Fett always astounded me. He only appeared in maybe a half hour of the original trilogy and said at most two lines before meeting his end in the Sarlaac Pit. Fans love him but bringing him back would derail the narrative too much. Leave him in the sarlaac’s stomach. – WG

BRITISH ACTORS FOR VILLAINS: One of the great, subtle things in the original Star Wars trilogy was the casting of British actors as nearly all of the officers of the Empire’s Imperial Forces. Grand Moff Tarkin, General Veers, General Taggi, Admiral Piett, Admiral Ozzel, Captain Needa and Moff Jerjerrod all portrayed by British actors led by the great Peter Cushing. Their cultivated, precise speech adds a layer of almost banal sophistication to their villainy that would definitely be missed if Abrams and company just cast some Hollywood actor with a flat mid-Atlantic accent. Unfortunately, Abrams has already cast fan favorite Benedict Cumberbatch in his upcoming Star Trek Into Darkness so I doubt that the director would be eager to go to that particular well again so soon, but I am sure that there are plenty of other British thespians who would be up to the challenge. – RD

MAKE THE FILM FAMILY FRIENDLY, NOT KID FRIENDLY: Even though the original trilogy sold more toys that and film up to that time, it wasn’t created just to sell toys. It had action, thrills, scares and drama set in an outer space setting with lasers and lightsabers. The result was a film that both kids and adults could watch and enjoy.

The prequel trilogies got off to a bad start with that toyetic kid bait Jar-Jar Binks, but it didn’t get much better from there. Melodrama replaced real emotion, broad acting replace the more naturalistic acting of the original, and characters were designed less for their impact on the narrative than for how the would look on toy store shelves. The original trilogy was able to reach kids without trying. The prequels tried to reach kids, and lost a lot of adults in the process. Avoid that. – WG