Now That Disney Owns Star Wars, Will Han Solo Shoot First Again?

Disney made a surprise announcement yesterday that it had acquired Lucasfilm, and its stable of characters, from owner George Lucas. Among high-profile properties Disney will be acquiring is the rights to the Star Wars universe and characters, and along with the purchase, Disney announced that a new Star Wars film would hit theaters in 2015. Lucas will reportedly stay on as a "creative consultant," but at this point it's Disney's show. 

The announcement led to a lot of predictable grousing from Star Wars fans about how Disney's goliath corporate interests would ruin a franchise that has, until now, been controlled by its visionary creator. 

I'm as fond of the Star Wars universe as anyone (OK, maybe not this guy), but on this one I side with the Empire. Lucas' management of the franchise over the last couple decades has not exactly been stellar. I waited in line for hours to see each of the Star Wars prequels, and even dressed in a homemade costume for the first. But, like the majority of viewers, I came away pretty disappointed with all of them.

Nor is Lucas content merely to make mediocre sequels. His constant reworking of the original trilogy — adding new effects and scenes while changing key, character defining moments — has only made the first three movies worse. Indeed, Lucas often seems to take some a perverse pleasure in refusing to give the fans what they actually want, including something as obvious as a no-frills high-definition releases of the original trilogy in its original form, without any additional updates or edits, where Han Solo shoots first and there are no computer-generated song-and-dance routines, as it was meant to be.

But as Jonathan Last suggests, that may change now that there's a big corporation in charge of the franchise rather than a prickly creator:

For too long we’ve been held hostage to the personal artistic visions of George Lucas who, like Stalin airbrushing his enemies out of state photographs, carefully disappeared the original theatrical cuts so that Gredo could shoot first, CGI spectacle could muddle up Mos Eisley, and a young Hayden Christiansen could appear to Luke Skywalker and automatically make him realize that he’s his dad.

Now Disney’s corporate greed could give us the product we’ve always craved. All hail Disney corporate greed!

I even think there's even hope for the new Star Wars movie. Since buying Marvel Comics in 2009, Disney has proven quite adept at handling beloved franchises and characters, putting fanboy-fave Joss Whedon in charge of The Avengers, which turned out to be pretty great. There's obviously a place for personal artistic visions and work that challenges fans, but in the case of huge mass-market properties like Star Wars, big corporations probably have stronger incentives than wealthy individual creators to produce work that mass audiences really like. That obviously doesn't mean that they always follow through with a fantastic product. But as Lucas proves, individual creators don't always deliver either. 

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • robc||

    [insert morning thread comments here]

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Joss Whedon is a hack.

    That is all.

  • ||

    Yes, Firefly was a total hack job. I can't believe it was even allowed on the air for the short time it was.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Considering that it was aired out of order, that does sound like it was pretty hacked up.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    You don't know Joss, son, so I'll tell you this once. If he hacks you, you'll be awake, you'll be facing him, and you'll be armed.

  • JW||

    Joss Whedon is a hack.

    No, he's a modern-day liberal douchebag, who also happens to make some very fine tee-vee and movies.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Please, Joss Whedon single-handedly pussified sci-fi/fantasy. Before that Buffy shit, you didn't have such a large population of fangirls squeeing and all that other shit they do over "fandom". That's purely based on his pandering, changing sci-fi from stories in which science is an integral part of the plot into merely an "aesethic". He did the same thing with horror. All of his shows are romantic drama with a genre frosting. Fuck him. Furthermore, Whedon, with his 90210 casting is the reason sci-fi/fantasy now casts primarily for looks.

    In a sane and just world, Joss Whedon would have been impaled on a wooden stake.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    *aesthetic

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Meh. Better that than the Treknobabble that permeated the other branches of made-for-TV science fiction.

    Let's face it, a good bit of TV sci-fi uses fake (and laughably bad) "science" as a way to cover up pathetic scripts and bad or non-existent story arcs.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Better that than the Treknobabble that permeated the other branches of made-for-TV science fiction.

    You. Take. That. Back.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    And what's more, your mother *was* a Pomeranian of inferior stock!

  • Cytotoxic||

    No he's right. Whedon was right to take out the shitty 'science' too bad he replaced with more garbage. If the shows aren't willing to do the science right, House style, then they shouldn't bother.

    Whedon and Trek both suck.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    By the way, it's been 16 years and I'm still pissed the Sci-Fi Channel changed the ending to The Cold Equations.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    They didn't just change the ending, they changed the whole point of the story to EVIL CORPORASHUNS!!!!1!!!11!!!

  • Xenocles||

    What did sci-fi cast for before Whedon? It certainly didn't seem to be talent.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    What did sci-fi cast for before Whedon?

    Verisimilitude. They didn't ignore that the universe has ugly people living in it.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    So you think Niska was hot? There were plenty of uglies in Firefly.

    The main (human) characters in popular sci-fi have always been good-looking, just like in other pop media.

  • JW||

    If I want to look at ugly people, I'll go to the mall.

  • ||

    Your inability to appreciate excellent dialogue, Sarah Michelle Gellar, and fully -developed-before-airing-unlike-BSG storylines is your problem, not mine.

    And DON'T TALK SHIT ABOUT MORENA BACCARIN

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    See that's the problem. You're supposed to say DON'T TALK SHIT ABOUT CHRISTINA HENDRICKS, but Whedon's subliminal Jezebel shit has infected your mind.

    Now go back to squeeing over your Snape/Professor X/Big Time Rush slash fan-fic.

  • ||

    Christina Hendricks looked amazing in Firefly, but she's a fatty now. Baccarin is not. And why are you ignoring Jewel Staite? Asshole.

    And my slash fic is Kirk/Spock slash fic custom written by NutraSweet, thank you very much. Idiot.

  • Trespassers W||

    Which was one was Jewel Staite on Firefly? Oh yeah, the hot one.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    Wow. No one even mentions Summer Glau. John truly has won.

  • ||

    Glau looked like a crazy person on Firefly. If you want to see her looking good, watch Sarah Connor Chronicles.

  • Cytotoxic||

    watch Sarah Connor Chronicles.

    NOPE.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    You're missing out.

    SCC was -- surprisingly -- good science fiction.

  • Mensan||

    Not really, but it it did confirm once and for all that Shirley Manson is repulsive.

  • Loki||

    They also made her up to look like she was ~14 or 15 in Firefly. She also looked good in the shitty and thankfully short lived The Cape a couple of years ago. But like I said, that show fucking sucked: she was the only redeemable feature.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    They also made her up to look like she was ~14 or 15 in Firefly.

    Nerds tend to obsess over two female archetypes--the 14-year-old waif or the hyper-sexualized MILF--who, typically, are Grrrrl Power types that can dispatch men with ease.

    Whedon, being a nerd, has never grown past this pathetically childish view of women.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    And why are you ignoring Jewel Staite?

    She eats poutine.

    'Nuff said

  • ||

    Jesus Christ, dude, poutine is great. What's wrong with you? Did you wake up on the wrong side of Assholetown today? Or did last night's date with Warty not work out like you'd planned? Here's a tip: IT NEVER DOES.

  • Cytotoxic||

    Poutine is gross.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    You take that back.

  • Big 'Orra||

  • John||

    Screw Gellar. She looks like a mouse. Lets talk Kristy Swanson. She is and always will be the only Buffy.

  • ||

    What?!? You're dead to me, John! Dead!!!

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Gellar's also a terrible actress.

    At least the Firefly cast was serviceable in the acting department.

  • robc||

    Swanson is the better Buffy, but the writing was better on the series.

    Gellar was too whiny.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    She looks like a mouse.

    A titmouse?

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Your inability to appreciate excellent dialogue, Sarah Michelle Gellar, and fully -developed-before-airing-unlike-BSG storylines is your problem, not mine

    Excellent dialogue? Really? Watch the Buffy series again or even Firefly. The dialogue consists of little more than glib snaps and self-deprecatory ironic posing that you'd find on a Something Awful forum.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    This was going on long before Whedon. It's reflective of our society becoming more and more scientifically ignorant, if not positively anti-science.

  • db||

    Space operas never existed before Whedon?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Space operas, yes. Soap operas in space? Not so much.

  • db||

    You specifically complained about stories where science is merely an aesthetic background or plot device. That kind of story far predates Whedon's influence.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Read the Lensmen and tell me if space opera has to be devoid of science as plot driver.

    I realize that Whedon wasn't the first to use sci-fi merely as an aesthetic, but it seems I didn't write that clearly enough. Still, if we're talking about current pop culture, then, yes, Whedon is the schwerpunkt for this nonsense.

  • SugarFree||

    That's purely based on his pandering, changing sci-fi from stories in which science is an integral part of the plot into merely an "aesethic".

    Please tell me of these shows with scientific verisimilitude before Whedon. Was it when the deflector shields were fed through the warp engines or when Buck Rodgers was hanging out with that midget disco robot?

  • ||

    He should tell us how ugly Erin Gray was, too.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    I've urinated in better than her.

  • ||

    Tell us more, Tulpa...

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Shaddup, Vork.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Considering Japan already has midget disco robots and Hawking has said he's currently working on warp drive...

    Seriously though, in shows like Star Trek, science (yes, fictional, but it was extrapolated from current ideas) was an inherent part of the plot. There was, usually, a mystery or problem and science was used to find the solution. The drama came from the characters working together to find the solution. You can't deny that this has been increasingly rare in what is called "sci-fi" in the past decade and a half and the popularity of Whedon is a big part of that. Abrams is also a factor, what with his disdain for 'geeky talk-fests'.

  • ||

    Dude, anything but TOS plots are the worst kind of plot complication nonsense on the planet. The A-Team had more organic plots than TNG. I don't know what you're pining for but if it's Lost in Space you have problems.

  • Cytotoxic||

    You keep using that word 'science'. It doesn't mean what you think it means.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    You keep using that word 'science'. It doesn't mean what you think it means.

    Do you take umbrage with the fact that the 'science' in sci-fi is extrapolation from current knowledge? I thought that would be inherent with the term "fiction".

    In short, science fiction is stories where a problem exists and the protagonists use (extrapolated) science to solve that problem. If you can successfully tell your story in another genre without a massive change to the plot and its resolution (it's Western in space!), it's most likely not sci-fi.

  • JW||

    If you can successfully tell your story in another genre without a massive change to the plot and its resolution (it's Western in space!), it's most likely not sci-fi.

    That Star Trek was "Wagon Train to the stars," notwithstanding.

    You need to expand your definition of sci-fi. Most sci-fi is modern drama in a future or alternate setting. All that changes are the kinds of names and plot complications.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Most sci-fi is modern drama in a future or alternate setting. All that changes are the kinds of names and plot complications.

    That's exactly what I'm saying is wrong with TV and movie sci-fi.

    Y'all need to get some Gregory Benford up in here. He'll learn ya.

  • JW||

    That's exactly what I'm saying is wrong with TV and movie sci-fi.

    And I'm saying that it's just not tee-vee and movies. Books are the same. It's not the genre, it's human cognitive abilities and natural expectations.

    It's unavoidable, unless you want to write something that no one can literally understand or find any relational reference point.

  • CE||

    Star Trek as Wagon Train? It was more like Captain Kirk as Admiral Horatio Hornblower, outwitting the enemy with unconventional tactics.

  • Xenocles||

    Roddenberry pretty much pitched it to NBC as "Wagon Train in space."

  • SugarFree||

    What you are talking about was better represented in Firefly than anywhere else recently, maybe ever. No FTL, no sound in space, realistic depictions of fuel and flight plan calculations, no miracle saves based on technobabble (when a part is broke, it's broke and that's it).

    About the only real crap science they had was the terraforming problem (much more complex than their present state of science would make possible in the timeframe) and the artificial gravity / same gravity everywhere issue.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    To be fair, there were some serious plot holes in Firefly. Like the fact that Wash apparently knew where Alliance cruisers were at all times (enough that he could engineer flight plans to avoid them days in advance, and managed to find one to bring the injured Shepherd Book to). Yet when it was convenient for the plot they would be surprised to find one.

  • Cytotoxic||

    By this definition Halo isn't sci-fi.

    Teknobabble about tachyons and shit isn't science, extrapolated or otherwise. Do it right or not at all.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    The reason it's increasingly rare is because those stories all work the same way:

    Act 1: There's a problem (usually a problem that we can't see or don't care about or both; e.g., "there's something wrong with the warp core... again" or "Planet-o-tha-week is being threatened by something!")

    Act 2: Interchangeable Royal Smart People in the cast try to figure something out

    Act 3: Five minutes of Treknobabble saves the day!

    Sci-fi (thankfully) outgrew that phase. Technology and real science is interesting insofar as it explores an element of the human condition or furthers the plot. It's boring and lazy as a formulaic Problem of the Week, and makes for poor storytelling.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    it explores an element of the human condition

    *raspberry*

    Ugh.

    I for one, do like when "smart people" try to figure something out. That I find interesting. If I want to know what love is, I don't look for sci-fi.

    And no, I don't want you to show me.

  • robc||

    The key is to do the science in some way that it isnt a part of the problem/solution but an underlying aspect of the whole show.

    Like a show set in the Mote universe, for example, where the scientifically bogus, but mathematically sound FTL technology determines a lot. "warps" are specific point to point, so you can instantaneously jump from one solar system to another (if the connection exists), but within it you are restricted by standard slower-than-light physics. Which makes space battles possible.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I'll agree with that. And The Gripping Hand would make a great military sci-fi series...like a good version of Space: Above and Beyond

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Yup.

    Science and tech can work and be central aspects in a story (especially novel-length stories), but they have to be planned and consistently adhered to ahead of time.

    Star Trek and most made-for-TV Sci-fi is bad at creating and adhering to those kinds of constraints. The warp drive, for example, was a constant plot device but was never adequately explained in terms of what it could do beyond "go really fast".

    Voyager's "Threshold" is really the best example of the sort of creative "output" that you tend to get from sci-fi where the episode's focus is on the Royal Smart Person figuring something out through the healing power of Treknobabble.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Voyager's "Threshold" is really the best example of the sort of creative "output" that you tend to get from sci-fi where the episode's focus is on the Royal Smart Person figuring something out through the healing power of Treknobabble.

    We do not speak of Braga in this house.

  • ||

    We do not speak of Braga in this house.

    Finally you're making sense.

  • SugarFree||

    Everyone involved in "Threshold" should be peeled, salted, and then roasted alive.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    "warps" are specific point to point, so you can instantaneously jump from one solar system to another (if the connection exists), but within it you are restricted by standard slower-than-light physics.

    Space battles actually would be easy then. The defending force could just hang out at the warp-in point in their system and destroy the attackers one-by-one like the Persians at Salamis.

  • JW||

    In a sane and just world, Joss Whedon would have been impaled on a wooden stake.

    Meh. Different strokes. I appreciate the humor and light-heartedness that he injected into the genre.

  • Xenocles||

    Whatever your complaints about Whedon, legitimate or not, are made up for with this clip.

  • ||

    That's purely based on his pandering, changing sci-fi from stories in which science is an integral part of the plot into merely an "aesethic"

    Soooo....

    Like Star Wars.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Star Wars never attempted to pass itself off as "sci-fi". It was always an homage to 30's and 40's pulp sword-and-planet.

  • Bee Tagger||

    and even dressed in a homemade costume for the first.

    Pics, please.

  • JWS||

    I keep my original VHS copy as proof. Screw you Lucas.

  • Loki||

    One of my friends from college still has his VHS box set of the original unchanged trilogy with remastered THX audio. If only Lucas wasn't such prick he could have released that version on DVD instead of the original shitty 2 channel sound. But as I said, he's a fucking prick.

  • kinnath||

    I also have the original trilogy in the VHS box set.

  • ||

    Ditto!

  • JW||

    Mine is proudly sitting atop my DVD bookcase as we speak.

  • ||

    One of the DVD sets included the original, unedited trilogy as "bonus" discs. Those are the ones I watch.

  • ||

    As I said in yesterday's thread where people linked to the Disney acquisition, the smartest thing Disney can do is release "original" versions of episodes IV-VI with all of Lucas' bullshit revisions taken out. In THX certified sound, of course.

    HAN SHOOTS FIRST. THAT IS ALL.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Having a DVD "special feature" with uninterrupted footage of George Lucas' reaction to the first screening of this original release would be icing on the cake.

  • ||

    THIS IS GENIUS.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Too bad Montalbán is no more, so Disney can't work out a deal with Paramount for a Star Trek/Star Wars crossover. Yes, it would suck to do that, but it would suck on a historical scale.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Star Trek/Star Wars crossover, with all of the original cast of Firefly playing characters similar to their Firefly counterparts without ever acknowledging the show. Also, Wash dies. Again.

    For maximum Sci-fan butthurt.

  • Pro Libertate||

    But Kirk lives. And kills Wash. Mal forgives him, being so cool, and the two of them go out and pick up chicks with Han Solo.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Mal shoots first. Shoots Jar Jar first, that is.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    Is it whiny Abrams Kirk or badass Roddenberry Kirk?

  • Xenocles||

    It's a pity that Abrams cut out the scene from the end where it was revealed that the story was just a holodeck program for Riker's amusement, a la Enterprise.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    My only hope for the sequel is that Wesley Crusher, Q, and the Traveler go back in time and kill everyone in the Abrams universe and then make it go Big Crunch.

  • ||

    This is the most sense you've made in a while, Tulpy-Poo.

  • Pro Libertate||

    I confess that I would pay to watch that.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    Just to be clear, I don't have Wesley getting intestinally perforated by the Traveler at the end.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    You know, that wouldn't be a half-bad Tarantino flick.

  • Cytotoxic||

    ITT bitter clinging to old Trek.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Real Kirk, of course. What's the point of crossing over a property that ripped off the other property?

  • John||

    Yes that would be smart. Instead, they will probably have Lucas adding CGI effects to Toy Story.

  • Dr. Frankenstein||

    Don't kow if Ham will shoot first again as nature intended. I do know there will be no more Robot Chicken parodies. At least George Lucas wasn't a complete tool about the use of the franchise. I can't say if Disney can change its ways on this.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    Yeah... I wonder what's going to happen to the RLM/Plinkett reviews.

  • Xenocles||

    RLM will tell Disney to go fuck themselves because both parody and reviews constitute fair use.

  • Pro Libertate||

    I doubt Disney would attempt a C&D on a review, even one using that much footage. Not these days.

  • Dr. Frankenstein||

    No I don't think they will either. I was thinking more along the lines of fan fic.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Probably not, as everyone is into social media and viral marketing these days.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    Disney could easily kick him off YouTube regardless of fair use (as Lucas did once). Going after the RLM website would be harder but you can bet they have more litigation resources than Plinkett does.

  • Xenocles||

    I think he uses a different engine on the RLM site. Plus the Streisand effect, plus the fact that there are a lot of free speech lawyer activists spoiling for a case, whether pro-bono or fueled by anti-SLAPP damages.

  • Death Rock and Skull||

    An adult productions arm of Disney would be pretty awesome. They do pretty good with things that don't involve dynamic, complex stories.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    Lucas has claimed that the original prints of IV-VI were lost during the production of the 1997 special edition. The fact that the 2006 limited edition DVD of the pre-1997 original trilogy was only VHS quality video lends credence to that belief.

  • Pro Libertate||

    There is no way that's true. Way too much money in the product by then. He buried them with Joseph Campbell.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    Do keep in mind that nothing Lucas has done with Star Wars in the past 15 years has required the existence of the original prints. So he made decent money without having to use them.

  • Pro Libertate||

    My point is that it's unlikely the prints would go missing in the first place--we're talking about a property worth billions.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    Almost as unlikely as inserting a jive-talking homosexual bipedal rabbit into that billion-dollar franchise?

  • Pro Libertate||

    I'm not discounting the possibility of intentional destruction, mind you. Lucas is a little nuts.

  • Loki||

    See, I think if Jar Jar had actually spoken jive that would have actually been an improvement.

    "First Jive Dude: Shiiiiit, maaaaan. That honky muf' be messin' mah old lady... got to be runnin' cold upside down his head, you know?
    Second Jive Dude: Hey home', I can dig it. Know ain't gonna lay no mo' big rap up on you, man!
    First Jive Dude: I say hey, sky... subba say I wan' see...
    Second Jive Dude: Uh-huh.
    First Jive Dude: ...pray to J I did the same ol' same ol'!
    Second Jive Dude: Hey... knock a self a pro, Slick! That gray matter backlot perform us DOWN, I take TCB-in', man!
    First Jive Dude: Hey, you know what they say: see a broad to get dat booty yak 'em...
    First Jive Dude, Second Jive Dude: ...leg 'er down a smack 'em yak 'em!
    First Jive Dude: COL' got to be! Y'know? Shiiiiit."

  • Pro Libertate||

    Only Mel Brooks can get away with things like that.

  • Shmenge||

    I thought it was Airplane.

  • Death Rock and Skull||

    Horseshit. There are production copies, promos, and theater releases somewhere that can be refined.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    I'm just talking about the original prints. But there may be hope for the sources you mention.

  • SugarFree||

    I'd like to see his definition of "original prints". If he lost the camera negs, that's a huge amount of material to lose. If he's talking about the final cut negative master or the first strike work print, maybe. But those are usually retained by the distributor because they are the ones who oversee striking show prints for theaters.

    The idea that he just doesn't have the film from three large-scale motion pictures is a bit ludicrous, and sounds like a self-serving lie to justify only distributing his revisions.

  • ||

    He's lying. Any studio employee that lost those prints would be beheaded and left pinned on the walls of the studio as an example to others, and that goes for if they lost the prints to Troll 3, let alone Star Wars.

  • ||

    DON'T TALK SHIT ABOUT TROLL 3.

  • db||

    Plus, the original prints to these movies wouldn't simply be "lost." "Stolen" is more like it, and who has them? Maybe some connected fan who feared a Lucas destruction of the original work?

  • DRM||

    Fundamentally irrelevant. There are still plenty of good-enough theater prints and the like out there that, with proper digital processing, can still get us a Blu-Ray-quality non-Special Edition. Might cost Disney a whole million dollars to actually create one if they put a lot of effort into it.

    That's assuming Lucas hasn't been lying. The 2006 stuff isn't evidence one way or the other. He had to admit the 2006 version was possible because the LaserDiscs existed, so we got the almost-zero-work, any-hobbyist-could-have-done-it-at-home, LaserDisc-to-DVD transfer.

  • Xenocles||

    "The announcement led to a lot of predictable grousing from Star Wars fans George Lucas fanboys about how Disney's goliath corporate interests would ruin a franchise that has, until now, been controlled by its visionary creator."

  • NoTalentAssclown||

    HAN SHOT BAMBI'S MOM FIRST

  • DJF||

    JAR JAR SHOT HAN FIRST.

  • Restoras||

    So, how has everyone faired through Sandy? Just got back online - still no power and not expected back for 7-10 days. But hey, at least the economy will be booming now!

  • ||

    Well, here in Seattle I've only gotten sporadic texts from my mom about their power loss, so I'm doing just fine.

  • Pro Libertate||

    I'm great--sunshine, cool weather, and more sunshine.

  • R C Dean||

    Same here. Warming up today, though. Probably hit the low '80s.

  • Xenocles||

    That's pretty rough. I got texts from my mother once - she was drunk and she just wanted her friends to see her texting.

  • ||

    The sexts I get from your mom are way more explicit than that. Almost as explicit as the sexts I get from ProL's mom.

  • Xenocles||

    After her experience horseback riding I doubt you could possibly satisfy her.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Got the afternoon off on Monday so I could drive down the empty pike. No other impact.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    I just hope Disney never buys the rights to TekWar.

  • ||

    I am going to make you pay for this if it's the last thing I do. COUNT ON IT.

  • ||

    I hope Disney never buys the rights to Tron...oh wait....

  • Anonymous Coward||

    One day, Disney will acquire the rights to Dune and Han Solo will be remade as the Final Kwisatz Haderach.

  • Trespassers W||

    You know who they should get to write it? That J Abrams guy. I'd like to see a Star Wars that's more like Star Trek.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Really, all science fiction properties should be converged into one big epic film.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    Sea Quest DSV must have no part of it, though.

  • Xenocles||

    I like how they started off trying to do science fiction without space with that "our true final frontier" talk, and then by the third season there were aliens.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    I wish I had an interociter right now to turn you into a burnt-up crisp.

  • db||

    Boys, are you smoking up there?
    No!

    Are you building an interociter up there?
    NO!!

  • Cytotoxic||

    THIS IS GENIUS

  • Loki||

    You know who they should get to write it? That J Abrams guy. I'd like to see a Star Wars that's more like Star Trek.

    And with 50% more lense flair! In fact the entire run time of the movie will be nothing but lense flairs to the point where you can't even see what's happening.

    "Did Han shoot first this time?"

    "I don't know there was too much lense flair."

  • Pro Libertate||

    He shot because of lens flare.

  • John||

    The answer is really quite simple. Let the Muppets remake the entire series I to VI plus the three new ones.

  • B.P.||

    Now and forever, let this be the place for all HnR talk concerning Star Wars.

  • CE||

    Disney doesn't need to mess up Star Wars. Lucas already did, in episodes 1, 2 and 3.

  • IceTrey||

    Suderman and some of you posters are sorely lacking in Star Wars lore. Han does not shoot first. How can this be you ask. Because Greedo NEVER SHOOTS!

  • ||

    You just won the thread.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-PA)||

    Oh no, not more metaphysics...

  • ||

    Greedo's Paradox

  • Pro Libertate||

    Is this about voting again?

  • ||

    Suderman is not old enough to have actually seen when Han shot Greedo.

  • Brian from Texas||

    If Disney casts Johnny Depp as Han Solo I'll be very upset.

  • Pound. Head. On. Desk.||

    Will Han Solo Shoot First Again?

    If so, I'll consider believing in God again. Yeah, it's that unlikely. Disney won't release Song of the South but won't let go of its rights to it either.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement