-= Gametoast.com =-

http://www.streetinsider.com/Press+Rele ... 28436.html

There's not a lot of information about this yet, but there's a lot of buzz around Disney buying LucasFilm today. Whether or not this means more Star Wars movies is yet to be determined.

Edit: Star Wars Episode 7 slated for release in 2015.

Edit 2: Not a hoax

I have mixed feelings about this.

Agreed to boycott episode 7 if they break out into random song?
Never imagined this would happen though and I agree with yuke.

I see this more as a good thing after seeing how things with Marvel went.

I'm okay with this.

Moving_Target wrote:I see this more as a good thing after seeing how things with Marvel went.

These are my thoughts.

o_O What????!!!! What lie is this???? Its not a lie but......madness is going through my head.....I don't know what to feel. Im not so sure about this, well lol. efrefcdcqwsxwqz This is interesting. Most interesting.

Moving_Target wrote:I see this more as a good thing after seeing how things with Marvel went.

Yup. I'm happy as long as George can't touch anything. I don't want more prequel style movies. Anything closer to the original trilogy I'll be happy with.

Funny enough, we made some of the same comments when it was announced that Disney bought Marvel (stuff about breaking into song .etc). Anyway, given what Disney has done with Marvel, I'm pretty optimistic about the new trilogy

As long as Episode 7 has nothing to do with Sith if after RotJ, I'm ok.

But we already have another Star Wars episode that looks like it's made from Disney, it's just aliased as "Holiday Special".

Saw this earlier today, and while I don't know how I feel about how this may change the content of the (SW) universe as a whole, I do know that this means more main-series games. I can't not be a fan of that.

darthtyren wrote:As long as Episode 7 has nothing to do with Sith if after RotJ, I'm ok.

I don't see why this is an issue.

The "Rule of Two" is a VERY Extended-Universe-only thing. The only line in the movies that alluded to it was when Yoda said "Always two there are, a master and an apprentice." I'd like to point out that this does not HAVE to mean that there are only one master and one apprentice. Yoda could very well have meant that for every master, there is an apprentice, and vice versa. So they killed Darth Maul, now where's the other? He could have meant Sith come in pairs, and they found one half of a pair. Multiple pairs could exist.

In case anyone is looking for Lucas' thoughts on the issue, there's a video here: https://thewaltdisneycompany.com/blog/d ... -lucasfilm

Twilight_Warrior wrote:Multiple pairs could exist.

Pshaw. Never mind multiple pairs. Since when has the Rule of Two ever not been broken in the EU, Bane books excepted? Two there are, a master and an apprentice, and a whole sub-brotherhood of dark-side monks.

That said, the Rule of Two is an interesting concept that, quite frankly, I like and wish had been followed a bit more strictly. True, it'd get a bit repetitive if the same Sith master/apprentice pair were the antagonists of every story, but you don't even need dark-side users as antagonists just because it's Star Wars.

Eh... Good point. I just have it in my mind that the should try to one-up the previous antagonist when it's quite possible to do without making it a force user.

Will it be based off of an EU story, or does the new film have its own storyline?
I kinda want it to be based off of EU though.

Just sayin'

My initial reaction was "WTF is this blasphemy?" They'd earn my respect if they released the OT unaltered, or at least with fewer changes, but I'm still concerned that half the EU will get overwritten. Half my bookshelf is Star Wars books, and I won't exactly be pleased if most of it gets overwritten.

GangsterJawa wrote:

Moving_Target wrote:I see this more as a good thing after seeing how things with Marvel went.

These are my thoughts.

Same here.

Now people won't wonder why there are Star Wars and Indiana Jones attractions at the Disney themed parks. They will fully become part of the family.