Carrie Fisher Returning For STAR WARS EPISODE VII

[Koolblue13]

She worked it well in Blues Brothers, but I don't think she was acting.

[mjah]

Did any of you really think Fisher would look the same 30 years removed from Return of the Jedi?

Yes. We thought she would look exactly the same.

[DM72]

Yes. We thought she would look exactly the same.

I can tell.

[The Evil Genius]

I hope they can find a way to work Sam Witwer into the new movies. He's been providing a lot of voicework to the animated series and games.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

I remember Carrie Fisher doing a good acting job in "When Harry Met Sally."

I'm not sure that anyone could have been a good actress saying lines like "Will someone get this big walking carpet out of my way" and "Why, you stuck up, half-witted, scruffy-looking Nerf herder." Even Meryl Streep would have looked like a fool.

I would be more interested in her writing the scripts at this point.

Can you imagine being coked out of your mind and wearing a metal bikini and saying that Lucas gibberish?

---------- Post added March-6th-2013 at 03:12 PM ----------

I do believe her massive coke habit had something to do with her career never really taking off, though.

She's actually a pretty good writer. I've read a few of her novels. And I still think she conducted the best interview that Madonna ever gave in Rolling Stone a million years ago. There was a great exchange where they talked about men wanting to have sex with an image and not a person. For whatever reason, Madonna saying "Lay Leia" has stuck with me.

[Riggo-toni]

She will teach Hans' grandkids how to do a Jedi mindmeld.

[mjah]

I can tell.

Then why did you have to ask?

Thirty years is nothing. Who looks different after a mere 30 years? Nobody, that's who.

[AsburySkinsFan]

True, he did. I just think sequels/prequels that come out way later than the originals are just never good. I just feel like that there are so many people out there that want a Star Wars experience like there was from the late 70's/early 80's either to recapture their childhood memories or to catch what they weren't alive to see for themselves. People wanted Episodes 1-3 to be SO good, SO bad and when they weren't...it almost feels like they're trying to make an additional three movies after 4-6 to make up for the fact that 1-3 was such a letdown and to recapture some of that 4-6 magic.

And they gotta sell toys, shirts, backpacks, etc.

But, you're right. JJ Abrams is pretty damn good at what he does, so perhaps there's some hope that these could actually be good movies.

I totally agree, I know that I wanted 1, 2, 3 to be every bit the experience that 4, 5, and 6 were, heck I remember waiting outside of the movie theater as a kid for hours with my family to see Jedi. It was huge, call it desensitization or whatever but in many respects we've gotten a LOT harder to impress. That said, I was very impressed with Abrams' reboot of the Star Trek franchise, and I doubt he's going to try and keep the George Lucas "look" so while we'll never have the "Empire Strikes Back" awe that we all once shared, I think there is a pretty good chance that these next movies can be pretty darn good, if we don't over hype them. It's like the Presidential debates if one candidate is hyped to be the best ever in the world and they only manage to do a B+ job (while any other night that would have been pretty darn good) they still didn't live up to the expectations. Lucas screwed up 1, 2, 3 because of the actors he chose, was it really that hard to find quality young actors with fresh faces? And then there was the insistence on Jar Jar.... I know he was looking for a C3PO type sidekick but wow that was awful. Those flaws could have survived if the hype wasn't so stratospheric.

[Spaceman Spiff]

I totally agree, I know that I wanted 1, 2, 3 to be every bit the experience that 4, 5, and 6 were, heck I remember waiting outside of the movie theater as a kid for hours with my family to see Jedi. It was huge, call it desensitization or whatever but in many respects we've gotten a LOT harder to impress. That said, I was very impressed with Abrams' reboot of the Star Trek franchise, and I doubt he's going to try and keep the George Lucas "look" so while we'll never have the "Empire Strikes Back" awe that we all once shared, I think there is a pretty good chance that these next movies can be pretty darn good, if we don't over hype them. It's like the Presidential debates if one candidate is hyped to be the best ever in the world and they only manage to do a B+ job (while any other night that would have been pretty darn good) they still didn't live up to the expectations. Lucas screwed up 1, 2, 3 because of the actors he chose, was it really that hard to find quality young actors with fresh faces? And then there was the insistence on Jar Jar.... I know he was looking for a C3PO type sidekick but wow that was awful. Those flaws could have survived if the hype wasn't so stratospheric.

Ehhh, I don't think anything could paint Jar Jar in a positive light.

Actually, maybe the expectations for this series will be tempered because 1-3 were so awful. Maybe people won't be expecting as much. But I totally agree with the fact that we've become a lot harder to impress. I think part of this is...the acting in 4-6 wasn't the best, but back then the special effects were amazing and the story was great. And plus when you were a kid, the special effects and the story makes up for a lot, no kid goes to the theatre to see great acting. 1-3 comes along and...we're older. We've seen dozens of movies since then with special effects that far surpass 4-6, we are definitely de-sensitized to that aspect of films. We appreciate better acting and 4-6 just didn't have it.

I'm kinda curious to know as to how much creative control JJ Abrams has for these movies.

Slightly off topic, have you seen this documentary? http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_..._george_lucas/ Really good if you're a big Star Wars fan.

[Koolblue13]

Then why did you have to ask?

Thirty years is nothing. Who looks different after a mere 30 years? Nobody, that's who.

As a professional actress, it's her job to not age and always look the same. Look at Meg Ryan.

[Major Harris]

I'd rather see General Akbar.

It's ADMIRAL Akbar, sir.

[SkinsGuy]

AsburySkinsFan writes:

Lucas screwed up 1, 2, 3 because of the actors he chose, was it really that hard to find quality young actors with fresh faces?

It wasn't really the actors.

Some of them were no good (that little kid in "Phantom Menace" comes to mind), but Natalie Portman is a fine actress. She won an Oscar for "Black Swan".

It really is Lucas. He is a terrible actors' director. If you see the Star Wars documentary "Empire of Dreams", Harrison Ford (himself a Best Actor Oscar nominee for the movie "Witness"), talks about Lucas' impatience with the acting process. "Faster, more intense" is the only acting direction he ever gives.

Since Lucas directed four of the six SW movies, the special effects and action looked great, but the acting suffered mightily. The only SW film that had decent acting was the one considered the best of the bunch, "The Empire Stikes Back". That, however, had a real director at the helm in Irving Kirshner, who cared more about the acting.

If Lucas hadn't had that feud with the director's guild after "Empire", he might've been able to get some better directors to work on his films. Which might have meant better performances.

[Koolblue13]

It's ADMIRAL Akbar, sir.

And I'm exNavy. Shame.

[pjfootballer]

As a professional actress, it's her job to not age and always look the same. Look at Meg Ryan.

Oh Really??

[Botched]

I'm going to have to see it no matter what. I just hope they tone down the CGI usage for this movie. That's all I ask.